TY - JOUR
T1 - The Efficacy of Collaborative Referencing Intervention in Chronic Aphasia: A Mixed-Methods Study
AU - Devanga, Suma R.
AU - Sherrill, Martha
AU - Hengst, Julie A.
N1 - Funding Information:
This study was partially funded by the Marion Morse Wood Fellowship from the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign awarded to the first author. We acknowledge the support offered by the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Speech-Language Pathology clinic to schedule the research sessions within the clinic premises. We also acknowledge the work of research assistants at the Discourse Analysis Lab, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (Samantha Becker, Margaret Boland, Nicole Delgiudice, Caroline Dreifuss, Jennifer Gerry, Carissa Ernat, Andrea Jachino, Regan Kelley, Tara Marcoski, Suzie McDaniel, Vivian Muangsiri, Melissa Peitrowitz, Molly Rademacher, Claire Smego, and Erin Ward), and the Neurogenic Communication Intervention Lab, Western Michigan University (Maddison Hargreaves, Brittany Koptyra, Mikayla Raney, Julia Simon, and Kayla Vanderlaan). Finally, we thank the four individuals with aphasia and their families for participating in this research.
Funding Information:
This study was partially funded by the Marion Morse Wood Fellowship from the University of Illinois Urbana–Champaign awarded to the first author. We acknowledge the support offered by the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Speech-Language Pathology clinic to schedule the research sessions within the clinic premises.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.
PY - 2021/2/11
Y1 - 2021/2/11
N2 - Purpose: The feasibility of a collaborative referencing intervention (CRI) for adults with chronic aphasia has been documented in two descriptive case studies (Devanga, 2014; Hengst et al., 2010, 2008). The current Phase II mixedmethods treatment study replicates the CRI with four additional participants (using interpretive research) and investigates how it impacts a traditional measure, participants’ confrontational naming abilities, outside of game play (using multiple-probe single-case experimental design). Method: Four adults with chronic aphasia participated in the study composed of (a) three preparatory sessions, (b) five baseline sessions, (c) 15 CRI sessions with five treatment probes, and (d) six maintenance sessions. A collaborative confrontation naming (CCN) probe (i.e., dependent variable) was administered in each baseline, treatment probe, and maintenance session. Each CRI session (i.e., independent variable) consisted of a photo-matching game with participant and clinician partner taking alternative turns identifying and matching personally relevant treatment cards. CCN probes were scored using a multidimensional rating scale. Fidelity and social validity were also assessed. Results: Replication of the CRI showed successful and consistent referential learning in all four participant pairs. The multiple-probe analysis of CCN revealed a positive treatment effect on naming in three participants indicating that the CRI was efficacious. High fidelity was maintained throughout the study. Social validity interviews revealed positive outcomes and significant impacts of treatment on the participants’ lives. Conclusion: The CRI demonstrates strong clinical implications for adults with chronic aphasia. Future research exploring the treatment effectiveness and the implementation to a variety of clinical settings is warranted.
AB - Purpose: The feasibility of a collaborative referencing intervention (CRI) for adults with chronic aphasia has been documented in two descriptive case studies (Devanga, 2014; Hengst et al., 2010, 2008). The current Phase II mixedmethods treatment study replicates the CRI with four additional participants (using interpretive research) and investigates how it impacts a traditional measure, participants’ confrontational naming abilities, outside of game play (using multiple-probe single-case experimental design). Method: Four adults with chronic aphasia participated in the study composed of (a) three preparatory sessions, (b) five baseline sessions, (c) 15 CRI sessions with five treatment probes, and (d) six maintenance sessions. A collaborative confrontation naming (CCN) probe (i.e., dependent variable) was administered in each baseline, treatment probe, and maintenance session. Each CRI session (i.e., independent variable) consisted of a photo-matching game with participant and clinician partner taking alternative turns identifying and matching personally relevant treatment cards. CCN probes were scored using a multidimensional rating scale. Fidelity and social validity were also assessed. Results: Replication of the CRI showed successful and consistent referential learning in all four participant pairs. The multiple-probe analysis of CCN revealed a positive treatment effect on naming in three participants indicating that the CRI was efficacious. High fidelity was maintained throughout the study. Social validity interviews revealed positive outcomes and significant impacts of treatment on the participants’ lives. Conclusion: The CRI demonstrates strong clinical implications for adults with chronic aphasia. Future research exploring the treatment effectiveness and the implementation to a variety of clinical settings is warranted.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85100537428&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85100537428&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1044/2020_AJSLP-19-00108
DO - 10.1044/2020_AJSLP-19-00108
M3 - Article
C2 - 32585113
SN - 1058-0360
VL - 30
SP - 407
EP - 424
JO - American journal of speech-language pathology
JF - American journal of speech-language pathology
IS - 1S
ER -