1 / 16

2012 Adult Language Group NSW Speech Pathology Evidence Based Practice Network

What's new for semantic feature analysis? Revisiting a classic therapy technique. Linda Jones, Julia Murphy and Claire Layfield (Group Co-Leaders) Lyndsey Nickels - Academic Member Presented by Claire Layfield.

marion
Download Presentation

2012 Adult Language Group NSW Speech Pathology Evidence Based Practice Network

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. What's new for semantic feature analysis? Revisiting a classic therapy technique Linda Jones, Julia Murphy and Claire Layfield (Group Co-Leaders) Lyndsey Nickels - Academic Member Presented by Claire Layfield 2012 Adult Language Group NSW Speech Pathology Evidence Based Practice Network

  2. Semantic Feature Analysis • Aphasia is frequently associated with semantic breakdown • Semantic feature analysis is a technique that underpins the general philosophy behind many treatments for semantic impairments

  3. Semantic word retrieval impairment Object, picture or idea Semantics purrs 4-legs pet fur barks scales Phonological Lexicon dog rabbit fish house robin cat Phonological Buffer/ Phonemes k d æ o g t Slide modified with thanks to Lyndsey Nickels

  4. Semantic Feature Analysis GROUP ACTION PROPERTIES ASSOCIATION (Boyle, 2001; Boyle, 2004; Coelho, McHugh, & Boyle, 2004; Kiran, & Johnson,2008; Kiran, 2008; Rider, Wright, Marshall & Page, 2008)

  5. Semantic Feature Analysis • Semantic feature analysis therapy is provided at word level BUT our treatment goals are discourse based • Clinical Question: For people with aphasia, in what circumstances does SFA improve • Naming of treated items • Naming of untreated items • Generalisation to spontaneous speech

  6. Semantic Feature Analysis: CAPS • Initial searching by the group found 23 articles • From these 16 were CAPPED • The others were excluded because • Treatment data was not available (e.g. expert commentary) • Treatment was not applicable (e.g. neuroimaging) • The participants had speech and language impairments in addition to aphasia

  7. The Evidence: Research Design • Research design • Single case experimental design • Case series • Low level of evidence on NHMRC evidence hierarchy. • BUT well designed single case and case series, can be more powerful in terms of clinical applicability.

  8. The Evidence: Participants • No correlation between treatment efficacy and • Type of aphasia • Severity of aphasia • Time post onset • Aetiology • Representative of the group caseload

  9. The Evidence : Intervention • Variability noted in • Treatment schedules • Therapy duration • Individual vs group based • Variability noted in therapy administration • Cueing hierarchies, prompts, responses to errors • Added components of discourse (put word into phrase)

  10. The Evidence: Measurement • Measures included • confrontational naming (typically treated and untreated items) • Standardised measures • Generalisation measures typically discourse based (CIU, words and error production rates) • Participation measures: Social validity questionnaire

  11. The Evidence: Outcomes • Treated items • increased and maintained • Untreated items • Similar trends but reduced in magnitude • Standardised assessments • Small improvements to overall scores • Generalisation • At best “modest” improvements in discourse based measurements maintained over time

  12. Applying these results to clinical practice • Semantic feature analysis • Appears to be clinically feasible • Increases naming, reduces perseveration, and this transfers to conversation in the short term • What remains in question is • Is this technique more beneficial than other therapy techniques and • Is there a way of combining this technique with a second level of phrase/sentence level therapy which may generate and maintain functional communication improvements

  13. Future Research • Research investigating • Semantic feature analysis vs other techniques which is controlled for therapy dosage • Semantic feature analysis in group vs individual settings • Systematic investigation of enhancing maintenance and generalisation • Outcomes from acute and chronic phases of therapy • would all be helpful to determine the extent and nature of the therapy benefits reported in the literature to date

  14. Questions??? Target = Ruby Digs holes in new lawn Barks in the middle of the night Best Friend Jumps to get clean clothes off the line Steals shoes and chews them

  15. References • Antonucci, S. M. (2009). Use of semantic feature analysis in group aphasia treatment. Aphasiology, 23(7-8), 854-866. • Boyle, M. (2001). Semantic Feature Analysis: The Evidence for Treating Lexical Impairments in Aphasia. . Perspectives on Neurophysiology and Neurogenic Speech and Language Disorders, 11, 23-28. • Boyle, M. (2004). Semantic feature analysis treatment for anomia in two fluent aphasia syndromes. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 13(3), 236-249. • Boyle, M. (2010). Semantic feature analysis treatment for aphasic word retrieval impairments: What's in a name? Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation, 17(6), 411-422. • Boyle, M. (2011). Discourse treatment for word retrieval impairment in aphasia: The story so far. Aphasiology, 25(11), 1308-1326. • Boyle, M., & Coelho, C. A. (1995). Application of Semantic Feature Analysis as a Treatment for Aphasic Dysnomia. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 4(4), 94-98. • Cermak, L. S., Stiassny, D., & Uhly, B. (1984). Reconstructive Retrieval Deficits in Broca's Aphasia. Brain and Language, 21(1), 95-104. • Coelho, C. A., McHugh, R. E., & Boyle, M. (2000). Semantic feature analysis as a treatment for aphasic dysnomia: A replication. Aphasiology, 14(2), 133-142. • Conley, A., & Coelho, C. A. (2003). Treatment of word retrieval impairment in chronic Broca's aphasia. Aphasiology, 17(3), 203-211. • Davis, L. A., & Stanton, S. T. (2005). Semantic feature analysis as a functional therapy tool. Contemporary Issues in Communication Science & Disorders, 32, 85-92. • Falconer, C., & Antonucci, S. M. (2012). Use of semantic feature analysis in group discourse treatment for aphasia: Extension and expansion. Aphasiology, 26(1), 64-82. • Hashimoto, N., & Frome, A. (2011). The use of a modified semantic features analysis approach in aphasia. Journal of Communication Disorders, 44(4), 459-469. • Kiran, S., Ntourou, K., Eubanks, M., & Shamapant, S. (2005). Typicality of inanimate category exemplars in aphasia: Further evidence for the semantic complexity effect. Brain and Language, 95(1 SPEC. ISS.), 178-180. • Kiran, S., & Roberts, P. M. (2010). Semantic feature analysis treatment in spanish-english and french-english bilingual aphasia. Aphasiology, 24(2), 231-261.

  16. References • Kiran, S., & Viswanathan, M. (2008). Effect of model-based treatment on oral reading abilities in severe alexia: a case study. Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology, 16(1), 43-59. • Law, S.-P., Wong, W., Sung, F., & Hon, J. (2006). A study of semantic treatment of three Chinese anomic patients. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 16(6), 601-629. • Law, S. P., Yeung, O., & Chiu, K. M. Y. (2008). Treatment for anomia in Chinese using an ortho-phonological cueing method. Aphasiology, 22(2), 139-163. • Leonard, C., Rochon, E., & Laird, L. (2008). Treating naming impairments in aphasia: Findings from a phonological components analysis treatment. Aphasiology, 22(9), 923-947. • Lowell, S., Beeson, P. M., & Holland, A. L. (1995). The Efficacy of a Semantic Cueing Procedure on Naming Performance of Adults with Aphasia. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 4(4), 109-114. • Marcotte, K., & Ansaldo, A. I. (2010). The neural correlates of semantic feature analysis in chronic aphasia: discordant patterns according to the etiology. Seminars in speech and language, 31(1), 52-63. • Marcotte, K., Damien, B., De Preaumont, M., Genereux, S., Hubert, M., & Ansaldo, A. (2010). Neural correlates of semantic feature analysis in chronic aphasia: A multiple single-case study. Stroke, 41(7), e499. • Marcotte, K., Vitali, P., Delgado, A. P., & Ansaldo, A. I. (2006). The neural correlates of therapy with semantic feature analysis in chronic anomia: an event-related fMRI study... 44th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Aphasia, Victoria, British Columbia 15th-17th October 2006. Brain & Language, 99(1-2), 206-207. • Peach, R. K., & Reuter, K. A. (2010). A discourse-based approach to semantic feature analysis for the treatment of aphasic word retrieval failures. Aphasiology, 24(9), 971-990. • Rider, J. D., Wright, H. H., Marshall, R. C., & Page, J. L. (2008). Using semantic feature analysis to improve contextual discourse in adults with aphasia. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 17(2), 161-172. • Rose, M., & Douglas, J. (2008). Treating a semantic word production deficit in aphasia with verbal and gesture methods. Aphasiology, 22(1), 20-41. • Viswanathan, M., & Kiran, S. (2005). Treatment for pure alexia using a model based approach: Evidence from one acute aphasic individual. Brain and Language, 95(1 SPEC. ISS.), 204-206. • Wambaugh, J. L., & Ferguson, M. (2007). Application of semantic feature analysis to retrieval of action names in aphasia. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 44(3), 381-394

More Related