TY - JOUR
T1 - Evidence-based systematic review
T2 - effects of intensity of treatment and constraint-induced language therapy for individuals with stroke-induced aphasia
AU - Cherney, Leora R.
AU - Patterson, Janet P.
AU - Raymer, Anastasia
AU - Frymark, Tobi
AU - Schooling, Tracy
PY - 2008/10/1
Y1 - 2008/10/1
N2 - Purpose: This systematic review summarizes evidence for intensity of treatment and constraint-induced language therapy (CILT) on measures of language impairment and communication activity/participation in individuals with stroke-induced aphasia. Method: A systematic search of the aphasia literature using 15 electronic databases (e.g., PubMed, CINAHL) identified 10 studies meeting inclusion/exclusion criteria. A review panel evaluated studies for methodological quality. Studies were characterized by research stage (i.e., discovery, efficacy, effectiveness, cost-benefit/public policy research), and effect sizes (ESs) were calculated wherever possible. Results: In chronic aphasia, studies provided modest evidence for more intensive treatment and the positive effects of CILT. In acute aphasia, 1 study evaluated high-intensity treatment positively; no studies examined CILT. Four studies reported discovery research, with quality scores ranging from 3 to 6 of 8 possible markers. Five treatment efficacy studies had quality scores ranging from 5 to 7 of 9 possible markers. One study of treatment effectiveness received a score of 4 of 8 possible markers. Conclusion: Although modest evidence exists for more intensive treatment and CILT for individuals with stroke-induced aphasia, the results of this review should be considered preliminary and, when making treatment decisions, should be used in conjunction with clinical expertise and the client's individual values.
AB - Purpose: This systematic review summarizes evidence for intensity of treatment and constraint-induced language therapy (CILT) on measures of language impairment and communication activity/participation in individuals with stroke-induced aphasia. Method: A systematic search of the aphasia literature using 15 electronic databases (e.g., PubMed, CINAHL) identified 10 studies meeting inclusion/exclusion criteria. A review panel evaluated studies for methodological quality. Studies were characterized by research stage (i.e., discovery, efficacy, effectiveness, cost-benefit/public policy research), and effect sizes (ESs) were calculated wherever possible. Results: In chronic aphasia, studies provided modest evidence for more intensive treatment and the positive effects of CILT. In acute aphasia, 1 study evaluated high-intensity treatment positively; no studies examined CILT. Four studies reported discovery research, with quality scores ranging from 3 to 6 of 8 possible markers. Five treatment efficacy studies had quality scores ranging from 5 to 7 of 9 possible markers. One study of treatment effectiveness received a score of 4 of 8 possible markers. Conclusion: Although modest evidence exists for more intensive treatment and CILT for individuals with stroke-induced aphasia, the results of this review should be considered preliminary and, when making treatment decisions, should be used in conjunction with clinical expertise and the client's individual values.
KW - Aphasia
KW - Constraint
KW - Intensity
KW - Rehabilitation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=52949119483&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=52949119483&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1044/1092-4388(2008/07-0206)
DO - 10.1044/1092-4388(2008/07-0206)
M3 - Article
C2 - 18812489
AN - SCOPUS:52949119483
SN - 1092-4388
VL - 51
SP - 1282
EP - 1299
JO - Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research
JF - Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research
IS - 5
ER -