TY - JOUR
T1 - Efficacy of early cognitive-linguistic treatment and communicative treatment in aphasia after stroke: a randomised controlled trial (RATS-2)
AU - Hagelstein, Marjolein
AU - Koenderman, Mieke
AU - Prins, Niels
AU - Dippel, Diederik
AU - Koudstaal, Peter
AU - Visch - Brink, Evy
PY - 2011
Y1 - 2011
N2 - Background The two main approaches in aphasia treatment are cognitive-linguistic treatment (CLT), aimed at restoring the linguistic levels affected, semantics, phonology or syntax, and communicative treatment, aimed at optimising information transfer by training compensatory strategies and use of residual language skills. The hypothesis that CLT is more effective than communicative treatment in the early stages after stroke was tested in this study. Methods In this multicentre, randomised, parallel group trial with blinded outcome assessment, 80 patients with aphasia after stroke were included within 3 weeks post-stroke. Patients received 6 months of CLT, comprising semantic and/or phonological training, or communicative treatment for at least 2 h per week. They were assessed before treatment and at 3 and 6 months with the Amsterdam-Nijmegen Everyday Language Test (ANELT-A, primary outcome) and semantic and phonological tests (secondary outcomes). The intervention effect was evaluated by means of analysis of covariance, with adjustment for baseline scores. Results There was no difference between the mean ANELT-A score of the CLT group (n=38) and the communicative treatment group (n-42), at 3 months (adjusted difference 1.5, 95% CI -2.6 to 5.6) or at 6 months (adjusted difference 1.6, 95% CI -2.3 to 5.6) post-stroke. On two of six specific semantic and phonological tests, the mean scores differed significantly, both in favour of CLT. Conclusion This study does not confirm the hypothesis that patients with aphasia after stroke benefit more from CLT, aimed at activation of the underlying semantic and phonologic processes, than from general, non-specific communicative treatment (ISRCTN67723958 Current Controlled Trials).
AB - Background The two main approaches in aphasia treatment are cognitive-linguistic treatment (CLT), aimed at restoring the linguistic levels affected, semantics, phonology or syntax, and communicative treatment, aimed at optimising information transfer by training compensatory strategies and use of residual language skills. The hypothesis that CLT is more effective than communicative treatment in the early stages after stroke was tested in this study. Methods In this multicentre, randomised, parallel group trial with blinded outcome assessment, 80 patients with aphasia after stroke were included within 3 weeks post-stroke. Patients received 6 months of CLT, comprising semantic and/or phonological training, or communicative treatment for at least 2 h per week. They were assessed before treatment and at 3 and 6 months with the Amsterdam-Nijmegen Everyday Language Test (ANELT-A, primary outcome) and semantic and phonological tests (secondary outcomes). The intervention effect was evaluated by means of analysis of covariance, with adjustment for baseline scores. Results There was no difference between the mean ANELT-A score of the CLT group (n=38) and the communicative treatment group (n-42), at 3 months (adjusted difference 1.5, 95% CI -2.6 to 5.6) or at 6 months (adjusted difference 1.6, 95% CI -2.3 to 5.6) post-stroke. On two of six specific semantic and phonological tests, the mean scores differed significantly, both in favour of CLT. Conclusion This study does not confirm the hypothesis that patients with aphasia after stroke benefit more from CLT, aimed at activation of the underlying semantic and phonologic processes, than from general, non-specific communicative treatment (ISRCTN67723958 Current Controlled Trials).
U2 - 10.1136/jnnp.2010.210559
DO - 10.1136/jnnp.2010.210559
M3 - Article
SN - 0022-3050
VL - 82
SP - 399
EP - 404
JO - Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery and Psychiatry
JF - Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery and Psychiatry
IS - 4
ER -