1,816
Views
17
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Review Articles

Comparing higher and lower weekly treatment intensity for chronic aphasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon & ORCID Icon
Pages 1289-1313 | Received 15 Dec 2019, Accepted 28 Apr 2020, Published online: 04 Jun 2020
 

ABSTRACT

Optimizing intensity for aphasia treatment is a high priority research issue for people with aphasia, their families and clinicians, and could result in healthcare cost savings. An important aspect of intensity is the frequency of intervention, or how regularly treatment should be provided each week. While principles of neuroplasticity endorse massed practice, cognitive psychology has established superiority of distributed practice within normal learning. Neither concept has been conclusively tested in aphasia. There have been many literature reviews of intensity in aphasia intervention, but most have not investigated treatment intensity whilst also ensuring that therapy dose and treatment type are identical between study groups. Some have also combined studies across acute, subacute and chronic aphasia. We searched systematically for studies directly comparing higher and lower weekly treatment frequency in chronic aphasia. Eight studies were retrieved and rated for methodological quality. Meta-analysis was completed for group and single case experimental designs. Results showed that there are few studies investigating treatment frequency in chronic aphasia and their quality is low-moderate. Meta-analyses were inconclusive due to limited data, but there was no indication of either schedule being superior. Further research directly comparing treatment schedules is needed.

Video Abstract

Read the transcript

Watch the video on Vimeo

© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group

Video Abstract

Read the transcript

Watch the video on Vimeo

© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

The work was supported in part by a La Trobe University Postgraduate Research Scholarship and the NHMRC Centre for Research Excellence in Aphasia Recovery and Rehabilitation [grant number #1153236].

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.