| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Submitted on September 1, 2003
From Erasmus MC, Department of Neurology and Neuropsychology (S.J.C.D., D.W.J.D., F. van H., P.J.K., E.G.V.), and Rotterdam Aphasia Foundation/Rijndam Rehabilitation Center (W.M.E. van de S.), Rotterdam, the Netherlands. * To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: e.visch-brink{at}erasmusmc.nl.
Background and Purpose--Semantic deficits, deficits in word meaning, have a large impact on aphasic patients verbal communication. We investigated the effects of semantic treatment on verbal communication in a randomized controlled trial. Methods--Fifty-eight patients with a combined semantic and phonological deficit were randomized to receive either semantic treatment or the control treatment focused on word sound (phonology). Fifty-five patients completed pretreatment and posttreatment assessment of verbal communication (Amsterdam Nijmegen Everyday Language Test [ANELT]). In an on-treatment analysis (n=46), treatment-specific effects on semantic and phonological measures were explored. Results--Both groups improved on the ANELT, with no difference between groups in overall score (difference, -1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], -5.3 to 3.1). After semantic treatment, patients improved on a semantic measure (mean improvement, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.2 to 4.6), whereas after phonological treatment, patients improved on phonological measures (mean improvement, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.4 to 4.7, and 3.0; 95% CI, 1.2 to 4.7). Conclusions--No differences in primary outcome were noted between the 2 treatments. Our findings challenge the current notion that semantic treatment is more effective than phonological treatment for patients with a combined semantic and phonological deficit. The selective gains on the semantic and phonological measures suggest that improved verbal communication was achieved in a different way for each treatment group.
Accepted on September 2, 2003
Effects of Semantic Treatment on Verbal Communication and Linguistic Processing in Aphasia After Stroke. A Randomized Controlled Trial
Suzanne J.C. Doesborgh MA;
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
M. Smits, E. Visch-Brink, C. K. Schraa-Tam, P. J. Koudstaal, and A. van der Lugt Functional MR Imaging of Language Processing: An Overview of Easy-to-Implement Paradigms for Patient Care and Clinical Research RadioGraphics, October 1, 2006; 26(suppl_1): S145 - S158. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. H. Dobkin Rehabilitation after Stroke N. Engl. J. Med., April 21, 2005; 352(16): 1677 - 1684. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
|
Stroke Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search Copyright © 2003 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. |