Marika Schütz
Research: Evaluating the effects of intensive speech and language rehabilitation regarding speech, language, communication skills and quality of life for people with acquired aphasia and/or apraxia of speech (AOS) in the chronic phase.
Acquired brain injury (ABI) are a substantial contributor to death and disability worldwide (World Health, 2006), 16 million people suffer from stroke every year and more than five millions are left permanently disabled with severe handicaps making stroke the leading cause of adult disability. Speech, language and communication deficits are major aftermaths after stroke often leading to isolation and lifelong disability, requiring extensive assistance in everyday life (StrokeAssociation, 2016).
More than 15 000 persons suffer yearly from speech and language impediments following stroke in Sweden (Socialstyrelsen 2014). The current speech and language therapy in Sweden is often non-intensive and one-on-one individual, and many people with aphasia and/or AOS do not receive speech-language rehabilitation at all after the sub acute phase. The speech-language pathology (SLP) services over the country are diverse and many SLPs report problems with time constraints as a hindrance in their work with aphasic patients and their families (M. B. Johansson, Carlsson, & Sonnander, 2011). To create efficient and cost effective rehabilitation for people with chronic speech and language deficits we need more studies and new ways of providing SLP services. Brain plasticity and intensive training after stroke has gained ground over the last ten years (Johansson, 2011; Meinzer et al., 2004; Pulvermüller & Berthier, 2008). Regardless of the type of therapy used, several studies have shown that the outcome is better if the intensity of therapy is increased (Berthier et al., 2011; Berthier & Pulvermüller, 2011). Intensity has proven to be a crucial factor in rehabilitation of aphasia (Bhogal, Teasell, & Speechley, 2003; Bhogal, Teasell, Foley, & Speechley, 2003; Lee & Cherney, 2008, Breitenstein et al., 2017), but many factors are still largely unknown. More studies are needed to evaluate optimal timing for intensive treatment (Nouwens et al., 2015) at what recommended dose and frequency (Hula, Cherney, & Worrall, 2013). The aim with this study is to evaluate short and long term effects of intensive speech, language and communication rehabilitation for patients with acquired chronic aphasia and/or dysarthria concerning effects of speech, language, communication and quality of life.
Acquired brain injury (ABI) are a substantial contributor to death and disability worldwide (World Health, 2006), 16 million people suffer from stroke every year and more than five millions are left permanently disabled with severe handicaps making stroke the leading cause of adult disability. Speech, language and communication deficits are major aftermaths after stroke often leading to isolation and lifelong disability, requiring extensive assistance in everyday life (StrokeAssociation, 2016).
More than 15 000 persons suffer yearly from speech and language impediments following stroke in Sweden (Socialstyrelsen 2014). The current speech and language therapy in Sweden is often non-intensive and one-on-one individual, and many people with aphasia and/or AOS do not receive speech-language rehabilitation at all after the sub acute phase. The speech-language pathology (SLP) services over the country are diverse and many SLPs report problems with time constraints as a hindrance in their work with aphasic patients and their families (M. B. Johansson, Carlsson, & Sonnander, 2011). To create efficient and cost effective rehabilitation for people with chronic speech and language deficits we need more studies and new ways of providing SLP services. Brain plasticity and intensive training after stroke has gained ground over the last ten years (Johansson, 2011; Meinzer et al., 2004; Pulvermüller & Berthier, 2008). Regardless of the type of therapy used, several studies have shown that the outcome is better if the intensity of therapy is increased (Berthier et al., 2011; Berthier & Pulvermüller, 2011). Intensity has proven to be a crucial factor in rehabilitation of aphasia (Bhogal, Teasell, & Speechley, 2003; Bhogal, Teasell, Foley, & Speechley, 2003; Lee & Cherney, 2008, Breitenstein et al., 2017), but many factors are still largely unknown. More studies are needed to evaluate optimal timing for intensive treatment (Nouwens et al., 2015) at what recommended dose and frequency (Hula, Cherney, & Worrall, 2013). The aim with this study is to evaluate short and long term effects of intensive speech, language and communication rehabilitation for patients with acquired chronic aphasia and/or dysarthria concerning effects of speech, language, communication and quality of life.
less
InterestsView All (32)
Uploads
Papers by Marika Schütz