Suppr超能文献

国际失语症短期记忆和工作记忆缺陷评估实践调查。

An International Survey of Assessment Practices for Short-Term and Working Memory Deficits in Aphasia.

机构信息

Speech & Language Sciences, Newcastle University, King George VI Building, Queen Victoria Road, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.

School of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Western University, Elborn College, London, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2018 May 3;27(2):574-591. doi: 10.1044/2017_AJSLP-17-0057.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Recent research has highlighted the clinical relevance of understanding the nature of short-term memory (STM) and working memory (WM) deficits in persons with aphasia and the way these deficits affect linguistic processing and functional communication in activities of daily living. The psychometric properties of tests commonly used to identify STM/WM problems in individuals with aphasia, however, have been questioned. No previous study has sought to investigate assessment practices and attitudes by speech-language pathologists involved in aphasia management. Accordingly, the aims of this study were (a) to investigate both attitudes toward STM/WM assessment in individuals with aphasia, as well as the types and frequency of STM/WM tests used with individuals with aphasia, and (b) to explore factors (e.g., educational background) that may influence STM/WM assessment practices.

METHOD

Respondents recruited via professional and aphasia support organizations completed an online survey. The survey elicited information about the respondents' demographic and clinical backgrounds and STM/WM assessment clinical practices and views, including frequency and preferred use of specific STM/WM tests.

RESULTS

The majority of respondents reported regular use of STM/WM tests as part of aphasia management. Positive attitudes toward STM/WM assessments were also reported. The most popular rankings of tests were the Cognitive Linguistic Quick Test (Helm-Estabrooks, 2001), the Comprehensive Aphasia Test (Swinburn, Porter, & Howard, 2005), and the Token Test (McNeil & Prescott, 1978). Results suggested limited knowledge about measures that assess self-perceptions of functional memory abilities. Regression analyses showed that the frequency of reported STM/WM test use was similar between clinicians and dual-role researchers/clinicians, but their attitudes toward the value of STM/WM differed. U.S. and UK respondents reported similar assessment practices.

CONCLUSIONS

It is reassuring that STM/WM is taken into consideration by clinicians when providing aphasia management. Two of the most popular tests, however, have poor psychometric properties, and caution should be exercised in clinical decision making. The different value placed on STM/WM testing by clinicians and researchers/clinicians has implications for continuing professional development.

摘要

目的

最近的研究强调了理解失语症患者短期记忆 (STM) 和工作记忆 (WM) 缺陷的临床意义,以及这些缺陷如何影响日常生活活动中的语言处理和功能交流。然而,用于识别失语症患者 STM/WM 问题的测试的心理测量特性受到了质疑。以前没有研究试图调查参与失语症管理的言语语言病理学家的评估实践和态度。因此,本研究的目的是:(a) 调查失语症患者 STM/WM 评估的态度,以及与失语症患者一起使用的 STM/WM 测试的类型和频率;(b) 探讨可能影响 STM/WM 评估实践的因素(例如,教育背景)。

方法

通过专业和失语症支持组织招募的受访者完成了在线调查。该调查收集了有关受访者的人口统计学和临床背景以及 STM/WM 评估临床实践和观点的信息,包括特定 STM/WM 测试的使用频率和偏好。

结果

大多数受访者报告说,作为失语症管理的一部分,他们经常使用 STM/WM 测试。还报告了对 STM/WM 评估的积极态度。最受欢迎的测试排名是认知语言快速测试(Helm-Estabrooks,2001 年)、综合失语症测试(Swinburn、Porter 和 Howard,2005 年)和代币测试(McNeil 和 Prescott,1978 年)。结果表明,对评估自我感知功能记忆能力的措施的了解有限。回归分析表明,报告的 STM/WM 测试使用频率在临床医生和双重角色研究人员/临床医生之间相似,但他们对 STM/WM 的价值的态度不同。美国和英国的受访者报告了类似的评估实践。

结论

令人欣慰的是,当为失语症患者提供管理时,临床医生会考虑 STM/WM。然而,两个最受欢迎的测试的心理测量特性较差,在临床决策中应谨慎行事。临床医生和研究人员/临床医生对 STM/WM 测试的重视程度不同,这对继续教育发展产生了影响。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验