Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

European Stroke Organisation (ESO) guideline on aphasia rehabilitation

  • Marian C. Brady*
  • , Claire Mills
  • , Hege Prag Øra
  • , Natalia Novaes
  • , Frank Becker
  • , Fofi Constantinidou
  • , Agnes Flöel
  • , Katharina S. Sunnerhagen
  • , Jytte Isaksen
  • , Caroline Jagoe
  • , Luis M.T. Jesus
  • , Paola Marangolo
  • , Marcus Meinzer
  • , Ineke van der Meulen
  • , Pauline Campbell
  • , Leonard Ho
  • , Salman Hussain
  • , Katerina Hilari
  • *Corresponding author for this work
  • Glasgow Caledonian University
  • Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust
  • University of Leeds, School of Medicine
  • Sunnaas Rehabilitation Hospital
  • University of Oslo
  • Centre Hospitalier Sainte-Anne
  • University of Cyprus
  • University of Greifswald
  • Sahlgrenska University Hospital
  • Rigshospitalet
  • University of Southern Denmark
  • St. James’s Hospital
  • University of Aveiro
  • University of Naples Federico II
  • Rijndam Rehabilitation Center
  • University of Edinburgh
  • European Stroke Organisation
  • City St George's, University of London

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

9 Citations (Scopus)
22 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Evidence of effective aphasia rehabilitation is emerging, yet intervention and delivery varies widely. This European Stroke Organisation guideline adhered to the guideline development standard procedures and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. The resulting multi-disciplinary, evidence-based recommendations support the delivery of high-quality stroke-related aphasia rehabilitation. The working group identified 10 clinically relevant aphasia rehabilitation questions and rated outcomes’ relevance and importance. Following systematic searching, independent reviewers screened title-abstracts and full-texts for randomised controlled trials of speech-language therapy (SLT) for stroke-related aphasia. Results were profiled using PRISMA. Risk-of-bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias 1 tool. We prioritised final-value data. Where possible we conducted meta-analyses (RevMan) using random effects and mean, standardised mean differences (functional communication, quality of life, aphasia severity, auditory comprehension and spoken language outcomes) or odds ratios (adverse events). Using GRADE, we judged quality of the evidence (high-to-very low) and ESO recommendation strength (very strong-to-very weak). Where evidence was insufficient to support recommendations, expert opinions were described. Based on low-quality evidence we recommend the provision of higher total SLT dose (⩾20 h) and suggest higher SLT intensity and frequency to improve outcomes in aphasia rehabilitation. Similarly, we suggest the provision of individually-tailored SLT and digital and group therapy delivery models. Very low-level evidence for transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) with SLT informed the expert consensus that such interventions should only be provided in the context of high-quality trials. Evidence-based clinical-research priorities to inform SLT aphasia rehabilitation intervention choice and delivery are highlighted.

Original languageEnglish
Article number23969873241311025
JournalEuropean Stroke Journal
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Dec 2025

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© European Stroke Organisation 2025.

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'European Stroke Organisation (ESO) guideline on aphasia rehabilitation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this