Speech and language therapy: is it effective?

Is Aphasia Therapy Effective? Exploring the Evidence in Systematic Reviews

In December 1999, Greener, Enderby and Whurr reported the findings of their Cochrane review to assess the effects of formal speech and language therapy for people with aphasia following stroke. They concluded that aphasia therapy had not been shown to be “clearly effective or clearly ineffective within a randomised controlled trial (RCT)” (p. 1). Their conclusion led to much discussion among speech pathologists with some expressing grave concern that the outcome of the review would undermine the provision of services for people with aphasia and their carers. In this paper, evidence for the effectiveness of aphasia therapy that has been provided by published systematic reviews is critically explored. Clearly, challenges remain with respect to provision of evidence-based aphasia therapy. However, the weight of evidence accumulated over the years and synthesised in systematic reviews supports the broad conclusion that aphasia therapy is effective.

Training in communication skills for informal carers of people suffering from dementia: a cluster randomized clinical trial comparing a therapist led workshop and a booklet

The objective of the study was to evaluate whether a short training workshop in communication techniques is more effective than an information booklet for improving communication skills in informal carers of people suffering from dementia. 30 informal carers were allocated to the workshop sessions and 15 to the booklet. Outcome measures included awareness of communication strategies; perceived frequency of communication breakdown at home, and the associated level of distress; general stress; and consumer satisfaction. At six week follow-up, the workshop group demonstrated a significantly greater awareness of communication strategies than the booklet-only group. Both groups reported some reduction in the frequency of communication problems at home, and a reduction in the associated level of distress. The frequency of other problem behaviours remained stable. Satisfaction with the workshop indicated that training was helpful but depended on the stage of illness of the partner.

Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke

BACKGROUND

Aphasia describes language impairment associated with a brain lesion.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the effects of formal speech and language therapy and non-professional types of support from untrained providers for people with aphasia after stroke.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched: March 1999), and reference lists of relevant articles to December 1998. We also contacted academic institutions and other researchers to identify further published and unpublished trials. We searched The International Journal of Disorders of Communication by hand (known by other names in the past), from 1969 to 1998. Date of most recent searches: January 1999.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing: 1. Any type of formal speech and language therapy in any setting administered by trained speech and language therapists versus no treatment. 2. Any type of formal speech and language therapy in any setting administered by trained speech and language therapists versus any type of informal support for aphasia, given by speech and language therapists or volunteers, whether these were trained or untrained. 3. One type of speech and language therapy versus another type. Outcome measures included measures of any type of communication, other measures of functioning, numbers of drop-outs, and other non-clinical outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The principal reviewer collected the data, and assessed the quality of the trials with independent data checking and methodological advice. If we could not perform a statistical combination of different studies, we sought missing data. Failing that we provided a description.

MAIN RESULTS

We considered sixty studies in detail, from which we identified twelve trials suitable for the review. Most of these trials were relatively old with poor or unassessable methodological quality. None of the trials was detailed enough for us to complete description and analysis. We could not determine whether formal speech and language therapy is more effective than informal support.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

The main conclusion of this review is that speech and language therapy treatment for people with aphasia after a stroke has not been shown either to be clearly effective or clearly ineffective within a RCT. Decisions about the management of patients must therefore be based on other forms of evidence. Further research is required to find out if effectiveness of speech and language therapy for aphasic patients is effective. If researchers choose to do a trial, this must be large enough to have adequate statistical power, and be clearly reported.

Tutorial: survival analysis--a statistic for clinical, efficacy, and theoretical applications

Current demands for increased research attention to therapeutic efficacy, efficiency, and also for improved developmental models call for analysis of longitudinal outcome data. Statistical treatment of longitudinal speech and language data is difficult, but there is a family of statistical techniques in common use in medicine, actuarial science, manufacturing, and sociology that has not been used in speech or language research. Survival analysis is introduced as a method that avoids many of the statistical problems of other techniques because it treats time as the outcome. In survival analysis, probabilities are calculated not just for groups but also for individuals in a group. This is a major advantage for clinical work. This paper provides a basic introduction to nonparametric and semiparametric survival analysis using speech outcomes as examples. A brief discussion of potential conflicts between actuarial analysis and clinical intuition is also provided.

Evaluating intervention for language impaired children: a review of the literature

Intervention studies are divided into those which have examined the effectiveness of specific techniques and those that have attempted to examine efficacy within the clinical context. Of the specific techniques, imitation and recasting or expansion have been the most commonly examined. Results suggest that they may be equally useful in reaching targets but that input in context has more chance of generalising. Combinations of techniques such as 'milieu teaching' seem especially promising. Evaluation of general language training strategies has tended to show good results relative to controls, although care has to be taken to discriminate between changes brought about to interaction skills and those to specific linguistic structures. The paper also covers issues associated with evaluation including clinical outcomes and methodological considerations. A number of research directions are suggested.