Queensland Aphasia Research Centre, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Surgical Treatment and Rehabilitation Service (STARS) Education and Research Alliance, The University of Queensland and Metro North Health, Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2024 Nov-Dec;59(6):2554-2579. doi: 10.1111/1460-6984.13098. Epub 2024 Aug 16.
Aphasia impacts communication and relationships. While counselling is increasingly recognised as a component of the speech-language therapy role, the success of conversation partner training is typically measured in terms of communication alone. This scoping review aimed to describe how successful conversation is currently measured with couples-with and without aphasia, to inform the development of an ecologically valid measure for couples with aphasia.
The scoping review was reported in alignment with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Extensions for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-SCR). MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO databases were searched for conversation treatment studies for couples with and without aphasia. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were extracted from included studies and screened against the three-tier model of situated language to shortlist those that measure everyday communication. Items within shortlisted PROMs were further described using the refined International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health linking rules.
Following screening and full-text review, 46 studies were included, consisting of 24 studies conducted with couples with aphasia and 22 studies conducted with couples without aphasia. For couples with aphasia, 13 PROMs were identified that measured everyday communication. Of these, 23% were dyadic (i.e., measured from the perspectives of both members of the couple); however, they usually only appraised the communication behaviours of the person with aphasia. For couples without aphasia, eight PROMs were identified that measured everyday communication; all were dyadic and measured both attitudes and communication behaviours of both partners.
Conversation relies on the interaction of two people, and success in conversation is best rated by those having the conversation. The use of PROMs is recommended as part of person and relationship-centred practice; however, there is currently no validated PROM for conversation in aphasia that considers the perspectives and behaviours of both the person with aphasia and their communication partner. The PROM items identified in this study will form the basis of future research to develop a PROM for couples' conversations in aphasia.
What is already known on the subject Communication partner training (CPT) for couples, where one person has aphasia, can improve conversation skills and enhance relationships. Clinician-rated measures, such as conversation analysis, have been used to measure the outcomes of CPT. However, there is a lack of person-centred or self-rated outcome measurement instruments. that is, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for couples' conversations in aphasia. What this paper adds to existing knowledge We have identified outcome measurement instruments used in conversation treatment studies for couples with and without aphasia. We found that most PROMs used in aphasia treatment studies were not dyadic, that is, they did not include the self-report of both communication partners. In contrast, the PROMs used with couples without aphasia were dyadic and contained items that measured a more complex range of both partners' emotions, behaviours and attitudes. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? This study provides insights into the content and characteristics of PROMs for couples' conversation therapy and may assist clinicians in selecting outcome measurement instruments in their practice.
失语症会影响沟通和人际关系。虽然咨询越来越被认为是言语治疗角色的一个组成部分,但对话伙伴培训的成功通常仅通过沟通来衡量。本范围综述旨在描述目前如何使用有和没有失语症的夫妇来衡量成功的对话,为具有失语症的夫妇开发一种具有生态有效性的衡量标准提供信息。
本范围综述是根据系统评价和元分析扩展的首选报告项目(PRISMA-SCR)报告的。检索了有和没有失语症的夫妇的对话治疗研究的 MEDLINE、EMBASE、CINAHL 和 PsycINFO 数据库。从纳入的研究中提取患者报告的结果测量(PROM),并根据情境语言的三层模型进行筛选,以确定那些衡量日常沟通的 PROM。短名单上的 PROM 中的项目进一步使用改进的国际功能、残疾和健康分类链接规则进行描述。
经过筛选和全文审查,共纳入 46 项研究,其中 24 项研究是在有失语症的夫妇中进行的,22 项研究是在没有失语症的夫妇中进行的。对于有失语症的夫妇,确定了 13 个用于衡量日常沟通的 PROM。其中,23%是对偶的(即,从夫妇双方的角度评估);然而,它们通常只评估失语症患者的沟通行为。对于没有失语症的夫妇,确定了 8 个用于衡量日常沟通的 PROM;所有的都是对偶的,同时衡量了双方的态度和沟通行为。
对话依赖于两个人的相互作用,对话的成功最好由参与对话的人来评价。建议使用患者报告的结果测量(PROM)作为以人为本和以关系为中心的实践的一部分;然而,目前还没有针对失语症患者对话的经过验证的 PROM,该 PROM考虑到了失语症患者及其沟通伙伴的观点和行为。本研究中确定的 PROM 项目将成为未来开发用于失语症患者对话的 PROM 的基础。
关于该主题的已知内容:
对有失语症的夫妇进行沟通伙伴培训(CPT)可以提高对话技能并增强人际关系。已经使用临床医生评定的措施,如对话分析,来衡量 CPT 的结果。然而,缺乏以人为本或自我评定的结果测量工具,即用于评估失语症患者对话的患者报告结果测量(PROM)。
本文增加了什么:
我们已经确定了用于有和没有失语症的夫妇对话治疗研究的结果测量工具。我们发现,在失语症治疗研究中使用的大多数 PROM 都不是对偶的,也就是说,它们没有包括两个沟通伙伴的自我报告。相比之下,用于没有失语症的夫妇的 PROM 是对偶的,并且包含了测量更复杂的双方情感、行为和态度的项目。
潜在或实际的临床意义是什么?
本研究提供了关于夫妻对话治疗中 PROM 的内容和特征的见解,并可能有助于临床医生在实践中选择结果测量工具。