Searching for active ingredients in rehabilitation: applying the taxonomy of behaviour change techniques to a conversation therapy for aphasia

PURPOSE

A taxonomy of behaviour change techniques has been developed to help specify the active ingredients of behaviour change interventions. Its potential for rehabilitation research is significant, however, reliable use among allied health professionals has not yet been explored. This article describes the content of a conversation therapy for post-stroke aphasia using the taxonomy and investigates inter-rater reliability among Speech and Language Therapists.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Two Speech and Language Therapists undertook the same half day, self-led training programme in the behaviour change technique taxonomy and independently coded all materials in the "Better Conversations with Aphasia" programme. Inter-rater reliability was evaluated using the kappa coefficient and percentage agreement. Reliably agreed techniques were categorised according to the speaker and type of behaviour they targeted.

RESULTS

Sixteen behaviour change techniques were reliably agreed to be present. Inter-rater reliability was moderate (K = 0.465), and in line with satisfactory percentage agreement (79.8%). More techniques were used to target the adoption of new behaviours (15) than the termination of old ones (3). People with aphasia received fewer behaviour change techniques (10) than their communication partners (16).

CONCLUSIONS

Describing the content of conversation therapy with the taxonomy of behaviour change techniques offers clinically useful insights with potential to enhance both research and practice. The intervention is shown to target different types of behaviour in different ways, and offer different speaker groups different content. Non-psychologist users of the taxonomy may encounter challenges working with unfamiliar concepts and terminology, which may impact on reliable use.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONIn order to change communicative behaviours within conversation, feedback should focus not only on performance but also on the immediate social and emotional consequences of a behaviour.This study adds to the evidence that unhelpful conversational behaviours can be reduced by providing speakers with information about any unwanted consequences, and then agreeing on a supportive behaviour to use instead.People with aphasia should be offered the same range of behaviour change techniques as their communication partners.

Identifying mechanisms of change in a conversation therapy for aphasia using behaviour change theory and qualitative methods

BACKGROUND

Conversation therapy for aphasia is a complex intervention comprising multiple components and targeting multiple outcomes. UK Medical Research Council (MRC) guidelines published in 2008 recommend that in addition to measuring the outcomes of complex interventions, evaluation should seek to clarify how such outcomes are produced, including identifying the hypothesized mechanisms of change.

AIMS

To identify mechanisms of change within a conversation therapy for people with aphasia and their partners. Using qualitative methods, the study draws on behaviour change theory to understand how and why participants make changes in conversation during and after therapy.

METHODS & PROCEDURES

Data were derived from 16 participants (eight people with aphasia; eight conversation partners) who were recruited to the Better Conversations with Aphasia research project and took part in an eight session conversation therapy programme. The dataset consists of in-therapy discussions and post-therapy interviews, which are analysed using Framework Analysis.

OUTCOMES & RESULTS

Seven mechanisms of conversational behaviour change are identified and linked to theory. These show how therapy can activate changes to speakers' skills and motivation for using specific behaviours, and to the conversational opportunities available for strategy use.

CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS

These clinically relevant findings offer guidance about the processes involved in producing behavioural change via conversation therapy. A distinction is made between the process involved in motivating change and that involved in embedding change. Differences are also noted between the process engaged in reducing unhelpful behaviour and that supporting new uses of compensatory strategies. Findings are expected to have benefits for those seeking to replicate therapy's core processes both in clinical practice and in future research.

Comparing linguistic complexity and efficiency in conversations from stimulation and conversation therapy in aphasia

BACKGROUND

Efficacy studies have demonstrated the benefit of group conversation therapy for a person with aphasia (PWA). However, a PWA typically participates in individual therapy prior to group therapy. Stimulation therapy (ST) is the most common type of individual aphasia therapy. Ultimately, the outcome of therapy is to enable the PWA to communicate effectively with others, which suggests the need for conversation therapy (CT). Little efficacy data exist to demonstrate the benefit of CT between a PWA and a clinician, in part because no clear treatment outcome measures have been established. More information is needed to identify optimal ways to measure CT outcomes.

AIM

To identify ways to measure CT outcomes and to determine if there is a change in linguistic complexity and total talk time during conversation, samples were taken during CT and ST in two PWAs.

METHODS & PROCEDURES

Seventeen 6-min conversational samples per PWA were analyzed from a prior single-subject AB₁ AB₂ A alternating treatment study with randomized ordering of interventions across participants. Data were analyzed for seven measures of linguistic complexity using Systematic Analysis of Language Transcripts (SALT). Efficiency was measured using correct information units (CIUs) per minute and total talk time.

OUTCOMES & RESULTS

Per cent of complex utterances and propositional density were higher following CT. Four out of seven linguistic measures increased following ST. Total talk time was significantly greater for one PWA during CT compared with ST. No differences were found in CIUs/min across treatment types.

CONCLUSION & IMPLICATIONS

Linguistic complexity and efficiency appear to be conversational treatment outcome measures that are sensitive to change, which researchers might consider using.

Conversation focused aphasia therapy: investigating the adoption of strategies by people with agrammatism

Background: A recent review of interaction (or conversation)-focused therapy highlighted the potential of programmes targeting the person with aphasia (PWA) directly. However, it noted the key limitations of current work in this field to be a reliance on single case analyses and qualitative evidence of change, a situation that is not unusual when a complex behavioural intervention is in the early stages of development and evaluation. Aims: This article aims to evaluate an intervention that targeted a PWA and their conversation partner (CP), a dyad, as equals in a novel conversation therapy for agrammatic aphasia, using both quantitative and qualitative evidence of change. The intervention aimed to increase the insight of a dyad into facilitator and barrier conversation behaviours, to increase the understanding of the effect of agrammatism on communication, and to support each speaker to choose three strategies to work on in therapy to increase mutual understanding and enhance conversation. Methods & Procedures: Quantitative and qualitative methods are used to analyse multiple pre-therapy and follow up assessments of conversation for two dyads. Outcomes & Results: Results show that one person with severe and chronic agrammatic aphasia was able to select and practise strategies that led to qualitative and quantitative changes in his post-therapy conversations. The other PWA showed a numerical increase in one of his three strategies post therapy, but no significant quantitative change. Although both CPs significantly reduced barrier behaviours in their post-therapy conversations, neither showed a significant increase in the strategies they chose to work on. For one CP, there was qualitative evidence of the use of different turn types. Conclusions: Individually tailored input from a speech and language therapist can assist some people with chronic agrammatism to develop conversational strategies that enhance communication. Outcomes are influenced by the severity and extent of language deficits affecting, for example, single word writing. In terms of behaviour change for CPs, it appears that it may be easier to reduce barrier behaviours rather than to increase the use of facilitatory strategies. The results have implications for collaborative goal setting with clients undergoing conversation therapy.