Longitudinal study of reading and writing rehabilitation using a bigraph–biphone correspondence approach

Many thanks to MQ for her enthusiasm and diligence during this project. We also thank Lianne DiMarco MA, SLP, Francine Kohen MS, CCC/SLP, James Reilly PhD, CCC/SLP, and Michelene Kalinyak‐Fliszar MS, CCC/SLP for their assistance during this project. This study was supported by Dean's Research Incentive Award, 2003 (College of Health Professions, Temple University) and NIDCD Grant DC01924‐11 awarded to Temple University (PI: Nadine Martin).

Abstract

Background: Treatments for sound‐blending ability in phonological dyslexia that train single grapheme–phoneme correspondences have had mixed success. A more recent approach to re‐establishing sound‐blending abilities is to train correspondences of bigraph–biphone units (CV + VC  =  CVC) (Berndt, Haendiges, Mitchum & Wayland, 1996; Friedman & Lott, 2002). This approach has proved beneficial thus far, although the reasons for its success are not yet fully understood.

Many thanks to MQ for her enthusiasm and diligence during this project. We also thank Lianne DiMarco MA, SLP, Francine Kohen MS, CCC/SLP, James Reilly PhD, CCC/SLP, and Michelene Kalinyak‐Fliszar MS, CCC/SLP for their assistance during this project. This study was supported by Dean's Research Incentive Award, 2003 (College of Health Professions, Temple University) and NIDCD Grant DC01924‐11 awarded to Temple University (PI: Nadine Martin).

Aims: The purpose of this longitudinal investigation was to use the bigraph–biphone segment‐blending approach to improve both reading and writing abilities in an individual with phonological dyslexia/dysgraphia. Re‐establishing this ability laid the foundation for continued treatment with longer words and phrases.

Methods & Procedures: A case study design combining reading and writing treatment was used in three treatment protocols. Initially, treatment focused on improving the participant's awareness of bigraph–biphone correspondences and sound‐blending abilities for one‐syllable nonwords. The successful completion of this protocol was followed by two treatments to extend these abilities to reading and writing two‐syllable words and eventually phrase‐length material.

Outcomes & Results: Gains were made in all treatment protocols. The participant progressed from an inability to read one‐syllable nonwords to reading and writing phrase‐length material.

Conclusions: This study provides further evidence that using bigraph–biphone correspondences to train sound‐blending abilities can improve both reading and writing abilities in cases of phonological dyslexia. Furthermore, the success of this treatment programme illustrates the benefit of a targeted treatment programme even 5 years post onset of aphasia, for reading and writing rehabilitation.

Notes

Many thanks to MQ for her enthusiasm and diligence during this project. We also thank Lianne DiMarco MA, SLP, Francine Kohen MS, CCC/SLP, James Reilly PhD, CCC/SLP, and Michelene Kalinyak‐Fliszar MS, CCC/SLP for their assistance during this project. This study was supported by Dean's Research Incentive Award, 2003 (College of Health Professions, Temple University) and NIDCD Grant DC01924‐11 awarded to Temple University (PI: Nadine Martin).