Clinical Effectiveness of the Comprehensive, High-Dose Aphasia Treatment Program for People With Poststroke Aphasia

2Citations
Citations of this article
10Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Purpose: Intensive comprehensive aphasia programs (ICAPs) are a novel service delivery model incorporating best practice principles in aphasia rehabilitation. Despite increased evidence, adoption of this model into health care services remains limited. This study evaluated the feasibility and effectiveness of the comprehensive, highdose aphasia treatment (CHAT) program, a modified-ICAP, when implemented by a public rehabilitation facility in Brisbane, Australia. Method: A nonrandomized, Type II hybrid clinical implementation and effectiveness study design was employed. The CHAT program includes 50 hr of goal-directed aphasia rehabilitation, delivered over 8 weeks. Sixty-seven adults with poststroke aphasia consented to the study. Feasibility was evaluated using service statistics (i.e., referrals, adherence, dose) and analyzed using descriptive statistics. Effectiveness evaluated changes in participants’ language impairment, communication activity and participation, and quality of life at posttherapy and 3-month follow-up. Group-level data were analyzed using linear mixed models and Cohen’s d effect sizes. Minimal detectable change (MDC90) was used to determine changes at the individual participant level. Results: Fourteen cohorts of CHAT were delivered from February 2021 to December 2023. Sixty-five participants completed CHAT, with an average dose of 46.6 hr of therapy. Group-level analyses revealed significant improvements in participants’ language impairment, communication activity and participation, and quality of life (p

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Dignam, J., Burfein, P., Campbell, J., Coleman, A., Fraser, C., Halpin, J., … Copland, D. A. (2025). Clinical Effectiveness of the Comprehensive, High-Dose Aphasia Treatment Program for People With Poststroke Aphasia. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 68(12), 5938–5949. https://doi.org/10.1044/2025_JSLHR-25-00336

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free