Assessing Change in Communication Limitations in Primary Progressive Apraxia of Speech and Aphasia: A 1-Year Follow-Up Study.
Assessing Change in Communication Limitations in Primary Progressive Apraxia of Speech and Aphasia: A 1-Year Follow-Up Study.
复制标题
评估原发性进行性言语失用和失语症的沟通限制变化：一项为期一年的随访研究。
DOI：
10.1044/2021_ajslp-20-00402
复制
发表时间：
2021
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
Josephs,KeithA
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Utianski,ReneL;Martin,PeterR;Duffy,JosephR;Botha,Hugo;Clark,HeatherM;Josephs,KeithA
目的原发性进行性言语失用症（AOS）是以言语失用症为首发症状和主要症状的患者。许多发展失语症和/或构音障碍后期的疾病过程。先前证明，患有神经退行性AOS的患者经历了参与交流的减少，这进一步加剧了共同发生的语言缺陷。疾病严重程度的措施并不一定与参与限制的措施。这项随访研究的目的是描述这些患者的沟通障碍的变化，再次由（a）患者通过沟通参与项目库（CPIB）和（B）语言病理学家通过美国言语-语言-听力协会（阿莎）的功能性沟通测量（FCM）和适应性运动言语障碍（MSD）测量严重程度分级，以确定是否有显着的变化，这些和其他客观的语言和语言措施，在后续1年后。（10名男性，7名女性）在第一次访问后约1年返回进行第二次访问。使用相同的程序;对每次访视时收集的沟通措施进行统计学比较。参与评级和其他临床评估措施之间的相关性进行了计算，在第二次访问和第一次和第二次visit.ResultsThere之间的访问在AOS和失语症的严重程度在统计学上有显着差异，这些措施的分数的变化。两次访视之间的临床评估、MSD严重程度评级和所有阿莎FCM均发生显著变化，但CPIB无变化。相关分析表明，临床和参与措施之间的关系是复杂的;总的来说，AOS变化更严重的患者在参与限制方面经历了更大的变化。ConclusionsThe研究结果支持使用患者报告的结果测量，因为它们可以更好地反映患者的经历，包括因素的影响，如正在进行的语言治疗和神经精神病学特征的出现，以及日常功能的相关变化，而其他指标可能只是指示疾病的进展。补充材料https：doi.org/10.23641/asha.16528512
PurposeIndividuals with primary progressive apraxia of speech have apraxia of speech (AOS) as the initial and predominant symptom. Many develop aphasia and/or dysarthria later in the disease course. It was previously demonstrated that patients with neurodegenerative AOS experience reduced participation in communication that is further exacerbated by co-occurring language deficits . Measures of disease severity did not necessarily correlate with measures of participation restrictions. The aim of this follow-up study was to describe changes in communication limitations in these patients, again measured by (a) the patient via the Communicative Participation Item Bank (CPIB) and (b) the speech-language pathologist via the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association's (ASHA's) Functional Communication Measures (FCMs) and an adapted motor speech disorder (MSD) severity rating to determine if there are significant changes in these and other objective speech and language measures at follow-up after 1 year.MethodOf the 24 patients reported in the study of , 17 (10 men, seven women) returned for a second visit approximately 1 year following the first visit. Identical procedures were utilized; the communication measures collected at each visit were statistically compared. Correlations were calculated between the participation ratings and other clinical assessment measures at the second visit and for the change in scores on those measures between the first and second visits.ResultsThere were statistically significant differences in AOS and aphasia severity between visits. There were significant changes in clinical assessments, MSD severity rating, and all ASHA FCMs between visits, but not the CPIB. Correlation analyses suggest the relationships among clinical and participation measures are complex; overall, patients with more severe changes in AOS experienced greater changes in participation restrictions.ConclusionsThe findings of this study support the use of patient-reported outcome measures as they may better reflect the patient experience, including the influence of factors such as ongoing speech therapy and the emergence of neuropsychiatric features, and associated changes in day-to-day functioning, when other measures may simply index the progression of the disease.Supplemental Materialhttps://doi.org/10.23641/asha.16528512