A modified multimodal communication treatment for individuals with traumatic brain injury

A scoping review of communication outcomes measures in augmentative and alternative communication

Although outcomes are a critical component of evidence-based practice, measuring augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) outcomes remains problematic. This is, in part, because there is no consensus on how to operationally define AAC communication outcomes. To gain greater insight into AAC communication outcomes, we used the communicative competence framework to determine which areas of AAC intervention have received the greatest attention and how these outcomes are being measured. The following data were charted from the 77 studies that met the inclusion criteria for the scoping review: study design, study participants, study communication target (e.g., language, word learning, etc.), and communication outcome measurements. Across the included studies, researchers used a variety of standardized and non-standardized measures to assess outcomes. Seventy-seven percent of the studies assessed social skills and 62% assessed linguistic skills. A limited number of studies measured operational (14%), strategic (4%), and psychosocial (18%) skills. Using the communicative competence framework enabled us to identify gaps in the research that has been conducted to date.

A qualitative study exploring the effect of communicating with partially intelligible speech

Few studies have investigated how individuals with partially intelligible speech choose to communicate, including how, when, and why they might use a speech-generating device (SGD). This study aimed to add to the literature by exploring how this group of individuals use different communication strategies. Qualitative interviews were carried out with 10 participants with partially intelligible speech with the aim of investigating participants' perceptions of modes of communication and communication strategies. Transcripts were analyzed using Framework Analysis to investigate the role of SGDs alongside other communication strategies. Factors that influence why, when, and how a person chooses to communicate were identified and these were interpreted as an explanatory model of communication with partially intelligible speech. Participants described how they made the decision whether to attempt to communicate at all and then which communication method to use. Decision-making was influenced by the importance of the message, how much time is available, past experience, and the communication partner. Each communication attempt adds to an individuals' experience of communicating and influences subsequent decisions. This study suggests that individuals with partially intelligible speech are at risk of reduced communication environments and networks and that current SGDs may not be designed in a way that recognizes their particular needs.

Preference and visual cognitive processing demands of alphabetic and QWERTY keyboards of individuals with and without brain injury

Following a severe brain injury (BI), some literate individuals who require augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) strategies to support communication may benefit from the use of onscreen keyboards to generate text. A range of layouts are available to these individuals within specialized communication software. However, a paucity of information is available to describe user preferences, user perceptions, as well as the visual-cognitive processing demands of such layouts. Such information is critical to guide clinical decision-making for keyboard selection and to provide patient-centered services. This study: (a) described the preferences and perceptions of two onscreen keyboard layouts (QWERTY and alphabetic) and (b) used eye-tracking analysis to investigate the visual-cognitive processing demands between these onscreen keyboards for individuals with and without BI. Results indicated participants in both groups held a strong preference for QWERTY keyboard interfaces and had extensive prior experience using the QWERTY keyboard layout on mobile devices. Eye-tracking analysis revealed less visual-cognitive processing demands using a QWERTY keyboard layout for both groups but were only statistically significant for those without BI. Results suggest that use of a keyboard layout that aligns with client preferences and prior experiences (i.e., the QWERTY keyboard for these participants) may lead to increased satisfaction with the communication experience and increased communication efficiency.