Combining methods in the assessment and analysis of communication in aphasia

Benefits and shortcomings of different approaches

Authors

  • Charlotta Saldert University of Gothenburg
  • Malin Bergman University of Gothenburg
  • Josefin Holstensson University of Gothenburg
  • Sara Jönsson University of Gothenburg
  • Klara Nygren University of Gothenburg
  • Frida Vennman University of Gothenburg
  • Ulrika Ferm Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1558/jircd.v3i2.141

Keywords:

communication impairment, aphasia, interaction analysis, assessment, spouses, non verbal communication

Abstract

In this case study the benefit of using analysis of conversational interaction in clinical assessment of communication is explored. A diagnostic test revealed a severe global aphasia in a man. However, according to a questionnaire filled out by the wife, her husband had some functional communication. The description of the consequences of aphasia in this man was further modified and enriched by analyses of conversational interaction between the man and his spouse. The Measure of Participation in Conversation and the Measure of Skill in Supported Conversation show that the couple has strategies that facilitate communication. Activity-based Communication Analysis provides information about how the strategies are used and about the influence of different factors brought into the interaction by the situation and the individuals involved. Thus, although time consuming, analysis of natural conversations provide valid information that is of importance in assessment of communication and implementation of intervention that can have an impact on everyday life in persons with aphasia and their conversation partners.

Author Biographies

Charlotta Saldert, University of Gothenburg

Charlotta Saldert is a speech and language pathologist specializing in neurogenic communication disorders. She has a doctorate in linguistics from the University of Gothenburg in Sweden. Her research at the Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, at the University of Gothenburg, is focused on pragmatics and conversational interaction in relation to stroke and progressive degenerative conditions such as Huntington’s disease and Parkinson’s disease.

Malin Bergman, University of Gothenburg

Malin Bergman, Josefin Holstensson, Sara Jönsson, Klara Nygren and Frida Vennman are speech and language pathologist students in their senior year at the Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, University of Gothenburg.

Josefin Holstensson, University of Gothenburg

Malin Bergman, Josefin Holstensson, Sara Jönsson, Klara Nygren and Frida Vennman are speech and language pathologist students in their senior year at the Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, University of Gothenburg.

Sara Jönsson, University of Gothenburg

Malin Bergman, Josefin Holstensson, Sara Jönsson, Klara Nygren and Frida Vennman are speech and language pathologist students in their senior year at the Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, University of Gothenburg.

Klara Nygren, University of Gothenburg

Malin Bergman, Josefin Holstensson, Sara Jönsson, Klara Nygren and Frida Vennman are speech and language pathologist students in their senior year at the Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, University of Gothenburg.

Frida Vennman, University of Gothenburg

Malin Bergman, Josefin Holstensson, Sara Jönsson, Klara Nygren and Frida Vennman are speech and language pathologist students in their senior year at the Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, University of Gothenburg.

Ulrika Ferm, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg

Ulrika Ferm is a speech and language pathologist and specialist in augmentative and alternative communication (AAC). She works at DART – Centre for AAC and assistive technology at Sahlgrenska University Hospital. She has been within the field of AAC for 20 years and has extensive clinical and scientific experience. She did her doctoral dissertation in general linguistics at the University of Gothenburg in 2006. Main interests and research areas are interaction, AAC and social activities.

References

Ahlsén, E. (1995a). Activity demands and communication ability in aphasia: A protocol and a case study. In I. Moen, H. Gram Simonsen and H. Lødrup (eds) Papers from the XVth Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics, 1?12. Oslo, Norway: Oslo University, Department of Linguistics.

Ahlsén, E. (1995b). Pragmatics and aphasia – An activity-based approach. Gothenburg Papers in Theoretical Linguistics 77. Gothenburg: University of Gothenburg, Department of Linguistics.

Allwood, J. (1976). Linguistic communication as action and cooperation. Gothenburg Monographs in Linguistics 2. Gothenburg: University of Gothenburg, Department of Linguistics.

Allwood, J. (2000). An activity based approach to pragmatics. In H. Bunt and B. Black (eds) Abduction, Belief and Context in Dialogue: Studies in Computational Pragmatics, 47?80. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Barlow, D. H., Allen, L. B. and Choate, M. L. (2004). Toward a unified treatment for emotional disorders. Behavior Therapy 35 (2): 205?230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0005-78 94(04)80036-4

Atkinson, M. and Heritage, J. (1984). Structures of Social Interaction: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cheepen, C. (1988). The Predictability of Informal Conversation. London: Pinter.

Douglas, J., O’Flaherty, C. and Snow, P. (2000). Measuring perception of communicative ability: The development and evaluation of the La Trobe communication questionnaire. Aphasiology, 14 (3): 231?268. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/026870300401469

Ferm, U., Ahlsén, E. and Björck-Åkesson, E. (2005). Conversational topics between a child with complex communication needs and her caregiver at mealtime. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 21 (1): 19?40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07434610412331270507

Ferm, U., Ahlsén, E. and Björck-Åkesson, E. (2012). Patterns of communicative interaction between a child with severe speech and physical impairments and her caregiver during a mealtime activity. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 37 (1): 27?34. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/13668250.2011.649718

Fox, S., Armstrong, E. and Boles, L. (2009). Conversational treatment in mild aphasia: A case study. Aphasiology 23 (7?8): 951?964. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02687030802669526

Frattali, C. M., Thompson, C., Holland, A., Wohl, C. and Ferketic, M. (1995). American Speech-Language Hearing Association: Functional Assessment of Communicative Skills. Rockville, MD: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.

Glueckkauf, R. L., Blonder, L. X., Ecklund-Johnson, E., Maher, L., Crosson, B. and Gonzalez-Rothi, L. (2003). Functional outcome questionnaire for aphasia: Overview and preliminary psychometric evaluation. NeuroRehabilitation 18 (4): 281?290.

Goodglass, H. and Kaplan, E. (1972). The Assessment of Aphasia and Related Disorders. Philadelphia, PA: Lea & Febiger.

Goodwin, C. (1995). Co-constructing meaning in conversations with an aphasic man. Research on Language and Social Interaction 28 (3): 233?260. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi2803_4

Kagan A, Black, S. E., Duchan, J. F. Simmons-Mackie, N. and Square, P. (2001). Training volunteers as conversation partners using ‘Supported Conversation for Adults with Aphasia’ (SCA): A controlled trial. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research 44 (3): 624?638. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2001/051)

Kagan, A., Winckel, S., Black, S., Duchan, J., Simmons-Mackie, N. and Square, P. (2004) A set of observational measures for rating support and participation in conversation between adults with aphasia and their conversation partners. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation 11 (1): 67?83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1310/CL3V-A94A-DE5C-CVBE

Kelly H, Brady M. C. and Enderby P. (2010). Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010, Issue 5. Art. No.: CD000425. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD000425.pub2

Legg, C., Young, L. and Bryer, A. (2005). Training sixth-year medical students in obtaining case-history information from adults with aphasia. Aphasiology 19 (6): 559?575. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02687030544000029

Lindström, E. and Werner, C. (1995). A-ning: neurolingvistisk afasiundersökning. Stockholm: Ersta högskola.

Linehan, M. M. (1997). Validation and psychotherapy. In A. C. Bohart. and L. S. Greenberg (eds.) Empathy Reconsidered: New Directions in Psychotherapy, 353?392. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/10226-016

Lock, S., Wilkinson, R. and Bryan, K. (2001) SPPARC: Supporting Partners of People with Aphasia in Relationships & Conversation. Milton Keynes: Speechmark Publishing Ltd.

Nivre, J., Allwood, J., Grönqvist, L., Gunnarson, M., Ahlsén, E., Vappula, H. et al. (2004). Göteborg Transcription Standard V. 6.4. [Manual]. Göteborg: Gothenburg University, Department of Linguistics.

Oelschlaeger, M. L. and Damico, J. S. (2000). Partnership in conversation: A study of word search strategies. Journal of Communication Disorders 33 (3): 205?225. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9924(00)00019-8

Perkins, L., Crisp, J. and Walshaw, D. (1999) Exploring conversation analysis as an assessment tool for aphasia: the issue of reliability. Aphasiology 13 (4?5): 259?281. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/026870399402091

Perkins, L., Whitworth, A. and Lesser, R. (1997). Conversation Analysis for People with Cognitive Impairments (CAPPCI). London: Whurr.

Prutting C. A. and Kirchner D. M. (1987). A clinical appraisal of the pragmatic aspects of language. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 52 (2): 105?119.

Rayner, H. and Marshall, J. (2003). Training volunteers as conversation partners for people with aphasia. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders 38 (2): 149?164. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1368282021000060308

Rydeman, B. (2010). The growth of phrases. User-centred design for activity-based voice output communication aids (Doctoral thesis, Department of Philosophy, Linguistics and Theory of Science, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden). Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/2077/22204

Saldert, C., Eriksson, E., Petersson, K. and Hartelius L. (2010). Interaction in conversation in Huntington´s disease: An activity-based analysis and the conversation partner’s view of change. Journal of Interactional Research in Communication Disorders 1 (2): 169?197.

Schegloff, E. A. (1982). Discourse as an interactional achievement: Some uses of ‘uh huh’ and other things that comes between sentences. In D. Tannen (ed.) Analyzing discourse: Text and Talk, 71?93. Washington D.C: Georgetown University Press.

Simmons-Mackie, N. (2000). Social approaches to the management of aphasia. In L. E. Worall and C. M. Frattali (eds) Neurogenic Communication Disorders, 162?188. New York, Thiem.

Smith, L. (1985). Communicative activities of dysphasic adults: A survey. British Journal of Disorders of Communication, 20 (1): 31?44. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/1368282850 9012247

Sorin-Peters, R. (2004). The evaluation of a learner-centred training programme for spouses of adults with chronic aphasia using qualitative case study methodology. Aphasiology 18 (10): 951?975. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02687030444000453

Spreen, O. and Risser, A. H. (2003). Assessment of Aphasia. New York: Oxford University Press.

Thunberg, G., Ahlsén, E. and Dahlgren Sandberg, A. (2007). Children with autistic spectrum disorders and speech-generating devices: Communication in different activities at home. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 21 (6): 457?479. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/026 99200701314963

Todman, J. and Alm, N. (2003). Modelling conversational pragmatics in communication aids. Journal of Pragmatics, 35 (4): 523?538. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02) 00130-3

Togher L., McDonald S., Code C. and Grant, S. (2004). Training communication partners of people with traumatic brain injury: A randomised controlled trial. Aphasiology 18 (4): 313?335. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02687030344000535

Togher, L., Power, E., Tate, R., McDonald, S. and Rietdijk, R. (2010). Measuring the social interactions of people with traumatic brain injury and their communication partners: The adapted Kagan scales. Aphasiology 24 (6): 914?927. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0268 7030903422478

Wilkinson R, Beeke S, and Maxim J. (2003). Adapting to conversation. In C. Goodwin (ed.) Conversation and Brain Damage, 59?89. NewYork: Oxford University Press.

Wilkinson, R. (2010) Interaction-focused intervention: A conversation analytic approach to aphasia therapy. Journal of Interactional Research in Communication Disorders 1 (1): 45?68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1558/jircd.v1i1.45

Published

2012-12-31

How to Cite

Saldert, C., Bergman, M., Holstensson, J., Jönsson, S., Nygren, K., Vennman, F., & Ferm, U. (2012). Combining methods in the assessment and analysis of communication in aphasia: Benefits and shortcomings of different approaches. Journal of Interactional Research in Communication Disorders, 3(2), 141–169. https://doi.org/10.1558/jircd.v3i2.141

Issue

Section

Articles