Clinical and prognostic properties of standardized and functional aphasia assessments
Clinical and prognostic properties of standardized and functional aphasia assessments
复制标题
DOI：
10.2340/16501977-0070
复制
发表时间：
2007-05-01
影响因子：
3.5
通讯作者：
Kahan, Thomas
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Laska, Ann Charlotte;Bartfai, Aniko;Kahan, Thomas
目的：比较急性卒中后失语症患者的标准化和功能性失语症检查。设计：在2项前瞻性单中心研究中收集基线和6个月时的数据：一项观察性研究（研究I，n = 119）和一项吗氯贝胺与安慰剂的随机试验（研究11，n = 89）。受试者：急性卒中后失语症患者。失语症的程度采用Norsk Grunntest中的Afasi系数（Coeff）（标准化）和阿姆斯特丹-奈梅亨日常语言测试（ANELT）（功能性）进行检查。结果：Coeff和ANELT测量的失语程度在整个研究中密切相关（r（2）= 0.71-0.87，p < 0.0001）。在研究1中，24例患者在6个月内完全康复。A Coeff >= 49和ANELT >= 3.5同样很好地预测了完全恢复。Coeff是敏感的，以区分患者与AN ELT值低，而ANELT是敏感的，以区分患者与高Coeff values.Conclusion：这2个测试显示了密切和一致的correlotion随着时间的推移，是同样敏感的改善。它们具有类似的预测完全恢复的能力。标准化测试似乎更适合急性期失语症患者，而功能测试更适合亚急性/慢性期。
Objective: To compare standardized and functional aphasia tests in patients after acute stroke.Design: Data were collected at baseline and at 6 months in 2 prospective single-centre studies: one observational study (study I, n = 119) and one randomized trial of moclobemide vs placebo (study 11, n = 89).Subjects: Patients with aphasia after acute stroke.Methods: Degree of aphasia was examined using the Coefficient (Coeff) in Norsk Grunntest for Afasi (standardized) and the Amsterdam-Nijmegen Everyday Language Test (ANELT) (functional). Statistical comparisons were made using one-way analysis of variance and multivariate regression analyses.Results: The degree of aphasia measured with Coeff and ANELT correlated closely throughout the study (r(2) = 0.71-0.87, p < 0.0001). In study 1, 24 patients recovered completely within 6 months. A Coeff >= 49 and ANELT >= 3.5 predicted complete recovery equally well. Coeff was sensitive to differentiate between patients with low values on AN ELT, whereas ANELT was sensitive to differentiate between patients with high Coeff values.Conclusion: The 2 tests show a close and consistent correlotion over time and are equally sensitive to improvement. They have a similar capacity to predict complete recovery. A standardized test appears to be more suitable for patients with aphasia in the acute stage, while a functional test is more suitable in the subacute/chronic stage.