slide1 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
2012 Adult Language Group NSW Speech Pathology Evidence Based Practice Network PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
2012 Adult Language Group NSW Speech Pathology Evidence Based Practice Network

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 16

2012 Adult Language Group NSW Speech Pathology Evidence Based Practice Network - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

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. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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