1 / 25

Phonomotor treatment for anomia

Phonomotor treatment for anomia. Diane L. Kendall, PhD Associate Professor, Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences Research Scientist, VAMC Puget Sound. TODAY. Describe study Treatment Results Future. Veterans Affairs (VA) grant 2010- 2013 $850,000

sian
Download Presentation

Phonomotor treatment for anomia

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. Phonomotor treatment for anomia Diane L. Kendall, PhD Associate Professor, Department of Speech and Hearing Sciences Research Scientist, VAMC Puget Sound

  2. TODAY • Describe study • Treatment • Results • Future

  3. Veterans Affairs (VA) grant • 2010-2013 • $850,000 • Provide treatment to 30 individuals • aphasia and anomia

  4. Currently, • Data collection finished!!!!! • November 2012 • Analysis of ALL data • Finish June 2013

  5. TODAY • Describe study • Treatment • Results • Future

  6. Participants N=28 Chronic aphasia (>6mos) Left CVA 18 right-handed, 2 left-handed 18 Monolingual English 2 Bilingual (English dominant language since childhood) • Included: • Aphasia • Word retrieval deficits • Impaired phonologic processing • Excluded • Significant (severe) speech apraxia • Depression • Degenerative disease • Chronic medical illness

  7. General language test

  8. Test of ‘sounds”

  9. 1-year post testing Pre-treatment Testing 3-month post treatment testing Immediately post treatment Testing Treatment Phase N=14 Immediate treatment 1-year 1-week 3-months 1-week 1-week 1-week 6-weeks 1-year post testing Pre-treatment Testing 3-months post treatment testing Immediately post treatment testing Post usual care testing Treatment Phase Usual care control phase Delayed treatment N=14 1-year 3-months 1-week 1-week 1-week 1-week 6-weeks 6-weeks 1-week

  10. TODAY • Describe study • Treatment • Results • Future

  11. TWO PHASES OF TREATMENT • Phonemes in Isolation • Phoneme Sequences 1-, 2- and 3-syllables

  12. How can you tell if treatment works?

  13. TODAY • Describe study • Treatment • Results • Future

  14. Nouns * * * * * * Percent accuracy

  15. Conversation n=3 • VIDEO • Productivity(# of clauses, # verbal units, # words): • 2 of 3 more verbal output following therapy • twice the number of clauses, more verbal units, and more words when compared with before treatment output. • Grammar (% grammatical clauses): • 0 of 3 • Relevance (% of clauses containing new information, relevance of response to each prompt): • 2 of 3 improved • Efficiency (self corrections, interjections, irrelevant words): • there was no change in the overall efficiency

  16. Discussion • Results support our hypothesis

  17. Idea! “flower” word sounds F + L + OW + R

  18. TODAY • Describe study • Treatment • Results • Future

  19. New Grant N=40 Traditional treatment (standard of care) N=40 Phonomotor treatment VS.

  20. Acknowledgements • YOU!!!!! • VA RR&D Merit Review Grant #C6572R • UW Aphasia Lab • Liz Brookshire, MA • Megan Oelke, MA • JoAnnSilkes, PhD • Irene Minkina, BS • Lauren Bislick, MA • Rebecca Pompon, PhC

More Related