Samenvatting
Samenvatting - Afasie
- Vak
- Afasie
- Instelling
- Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen (RU)
Dit document bevat een uitgebreide samenvatting van het materiaal van de cursus Afasie, inclusief aantekeningen uit het boek en de colleges.
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 4 van de 61 pagina's
Voorbeeld 4 van de 61 pagina's
In winkelwagengesponsord bericht van onze partner
Verkoper
Volgen
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
Week 1: chapter 1, 3 and McNeil & Pratt (2001)Different definitions of aphasia throughout history; reflecting theoretical constructs; always
developing definition
Aphasia = acquired language impairment resulting from focal brain lesion in the absence of
other cognitive, motor, or sensory impairments (neurological); breakdown in specific
language domains resulting from a focal lesion (neurolinguistic); selective breakdown if
language processing itself, of underlying cognitive skills, or necessary cognitive resources
resulting from focal lesion (cognitive); communication impairment masking inherent
competence (functional)
→ can be present in every aspect of language (components, modalities, and input/output)
Researchers agree on:
● aphasia being mostly a language-level problem
● it includes receptive and expressive components
● has a multimodal nature
● is caused by a central nervous system dysfunction
Aphasia → acquired focal lesions in the language-dominant hemisphere
Focus on acquired neurological impairments → focus on the consequences of these
impairments (WHO)
For this text aphasia = acquired selective impairment of language modalities and functions
resulting from a focal brain lesion in the language-dominant hemisphere that affects the
person’s communicative and social functioning, and quality of life and the quality of life of
his/her relatives and caregivers.
Dysarthria = speaking disability
Dysphagia = swallowing disability
Long-term outcomes of people with aphasia → social isolation, depression, poor quality of
life (e.g. Cruice et al., 2006); people continue needing therapy
Treatment focuses on the individual person! Need for public awareness!
Underserved = communities where health and social services workforce is insufficient,
people experience barriers
Framework WHO (redefining functioning and
disability) for aphasiacs:
1) body structure and functioning →
impairments of the brain + its function
2) activity and participation → tasks/actions
involving the four language modalities + daily
functional communication tasks
,Environment (ICF) = relationships with others, policies and regulations, use of assistive
tech, physical environmental factors, and attitudes of individuals/society towards that person
with aphasia
Aphasia therapy = supportive process designed to help people with aphasia modify current
communicative behaviours to maximise communication proficiency
● Group therapy = didactic, social and emotional support; usually multipurpose
groups; positive efficacy (Wetz et al., 1981); essential component
○ Not as effective for functional discourse + all individuals
○ Effective for specific language processes (e.g. word finding); improved scores
on formal assessment
○ Positive changes in social networks
→ aphasia book clubs and choirs show positive outcomes, especially for functional
measures
● Pharmacotherapy = manipulation of neurotransmitter levels with the intent of
stimulating widespread cerebral activity; no specific impact on language, influence
cognitive substrates of language processing;
○ Galling et al. (2014) → non-fluent aphasia patient, bromocriptine + language
therapy → improvement language production, not comprehension → effective
for Broca’s and transcortical motor aphasia; only a combination helps
○ Zhang et al. (2018) → only donepezil (acetylcholine agonist) and memantine
(glutamate antagonist)
→ medication can enhance speech-language therapy to some extent; effects not per se on
language, but on underlying cognitive support functions
(agonist = creates response; antagonist = blocks response)
Technology in aphasia therapy → can be used, depending on people’s willingness and
abilities to use technology
● Additional practice = more therapy is better than less; therapy period becomes
more cost effective (possibility of at-home practice); extension of therapy contents →
should reflect rehabilitation process + closely followed by clinician
○ Independent skill practice
○ Overall effectiveness of application → Lavoie et al. (2017)
○ Contents need to remain individualised + tailored to the patient’s needs
● Communication compensation = external aid to communicate more effectively;
focus on functional measures and social participation implemented later in
rehabilitation, but this is challenged
○ Augmentative and alternative communication (AAC), should be adaptable and
can be temporary (Dietz et al., 2020)
○ Taylor et al. (2019) → age not necessarily a barrier for use; period of intense
practice is most crucial
○ Hoover & Carney (2014) → using apps improved functional language
measures + quality-of-life scales
,Telepractice = video contact between patient and clinician; used to fill service gaps in
different settings;
● Synchronous = interactive audio and video connection in real-time; similar to
traditional encounter; can connect client & clinician or an entire group with a clinician
● Asynchronous = store-and-forward; pre-recorded material for a practitioner to
review, e.g. language sampling
● Hybrid = a combination of synchronous, asynchronous, and in-person services
Effectiveness supported for patients with aphasia - Hall et al. (2013) → telepractice is
equivalent to face-to-face practices for both assessment and therapy
Weidner & Lowman (2020) → positive effect for diagnostic accuracy for telepractice; practice
through telepractice helps maintain naming skills
Cortical aphasia = symptoms related to a lesion of a specific area in the cerebral cortex,
e.g. Broca’s or Wernicke’s; subtypes that have hallmark features
Vs.
Subcortical aphasia = affected regions beneath the cortex can result in aphasia, e.g.
thalamus regulating speech, language and memory processing; ‘borderline fluent’ aphasias
● Thalamic = characterised by variable phrase length and auditory comprehension +
preservations but with good repetition skills
● Capsular = in anterior-superior white matter → good auditory comprehension +
repetition skills with impairment in naming and reduced articulatory precision;
posterior white matter → poor auditory comprehension + repetition, with adequate
articulatory precision but a variety of paraphasic errors; global/both → damage to
both anterior-superior + posterior white matter, severely limited verbal output +
auditory comprehension deficits, varying based on degree of extension into temporal
lobe
Language processed in left hemisphere → typically, lesion here leads to aphasia;
left-handed people have language partly lateralized to the right hemisphere →
right-hemisphere lesion can lead to aphasia for those individuals
Crossed aphasia = right-hemisphere stroke causing aphasia in right-hand dominant
individuals; present other impairments consistent with right-hemisphere damage, like
decreased attention to the left (left neglect) + visuospatial deficits
Ambiguity in defining fluent & nonfluent aphasia → neuroanatomical approach may group
individuals together who don’t necessarily have symptoms in common
Cognitive neuropsychological approach → examines language performance in individual
people with aphasia across all processing levels and modalities; emphasis on importance of
error pattern examination; explaining language impairment in aphasia through models of
healthy language processing
Focus on the individual level → treatment approaches applied broadly to a group
demonstrating similar patterns of spared/impaired processes
, Psycholinguistic approach → similar to cognitive neuropsychological approach; focus on
individuals; no limit to the number of language impairments someone with aphasia can
demonstrate; identifying impairments through psycholinguistic factors (e.g. phonology),
processes activating information at different language levels, and different modalities;
allowing isolation of impairment to target directly
Data-driven approach → use of statistical methods to identify relationships between
measures of cognitive performance and the brain; key language processes consistently
associated with damage in certain brain areas;
● Phonological production deficits associated with damage to dorsal stream → inferior
parietal and frontal regions
● Phonological comprehension deficits associated with damage to ventral stream →
posterior to anterior superior temporal lobe
● Semantic impairments after damage to anterior temporal lobe
● Syntax not domain specific?
Dual-stream model → visual and auditory processing
Network involving bilateral frontal, temporal, and parietal regions for healthy language
processing.
➔ Dorsal stream activation for phonological processing
➔ Ventral stream activation for semantic processing
➔ Syntax relying on both phonology and semantics
Aphasia fucks everything up
Schwartz et al. (2012) → phonological errors correlate with lesion in dorsal tract regions
(supports NT studies)
Ivanova et al. (2016) → better microstructural integrity in part of the ventral stream white
matter tract is associated with better word-level comprehension for individuals with aphasia
Interactions left-hemisphere regions during naming + semantic processing tasks differ
between NT and aphasia → associated with language performance in post-stroke aphasia
Hypothesis: intact domain-general regions carry out functions that can no longer be
performed by damaged domain-specific language regions
Thompson et al. (2010) → 1) individuals with aphasia rely on neurotypical language
networks if possible and 2) processing syntactic information relies on an underlying network
integrating semantics + syntax
Domain-general processes (e.g. memory) can underlie various linguistic processes in
individuals with aphasia
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper kayleevh1999. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €7,48. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 55534 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 15 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen