‘I do the best I can’: an in-depth exploration of the aphasia management pathway in the acute hospital setting

Abstract

Purpose: While research has begun to explore the management of aphasia across the continuum of care, to date there is little in-depth, context specific knowledge relating to the speech pathology aphasia management pathway. This research aimed to provide an in-depth understanding of the current aphasia management pathway in the acute hospital setting, from the perspective of speech pathologists.

Method: Underpinned by a social constructivist paradigm, the researchers implemented an interpretive phenomenological method when conducting in-depth interviews with 14 Australian speech pathologists working in the acute hospital setting. Interview transcripts and interviewer field notes were subjected to a qualitative content analysis.

Results: Analysis identified a single guiding construct and five main categories to describe the management of aphasia in the acute hospital setting. The guiding construct, First contact with the profession, informed the entire management pathway. Five additional main categories were identified: Referral processes; Screening and assessment; Therapeutic intervention; Educational and affective counselling; and Advocacy.

Conclusions: Findings suggest significant diversity in the pathways of care for people with aphasia and their families in the acute hospital setting. Additional support mechanisms are required in order to support speech pathologists to minimise the evidence-practice gap.

Implications for Rehabilitation

• Significant diversity exists in the current aphasia management pathway for people with acute post-stroke aphasia and their families in the acute hospital setting.

• Mechanisms that support speech pathologists to minimise the evidence-practice gap, and consequently reduce their sense of professional dissonance, are required.

Keywords:

• Acute hospital settings
• aphasia
• clinical decision making
• speech and language pathology

Declaration of interest

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.