Validity and features of spontaneous speech in acute aphasia as evaluated with the Brief Aphasia Evaluation: is fluent aphasia more severe than nonfluent aphasia?
Nora Silvana Vigliecca
Abstract
Purpose: To explore the relationship between the two components of spontaneous speech in the Brief Aphasia Evaluation (BAE) and the rest of the scale represented by its three main factors: The Expression, Comprehension, and Complementary factors. Methods: BAE has proven validity and reliability. The evaluation of spontaneous speech in this scale comprises two components: Performance Rank (score: 0-3) and Type of Disorder (Fluency [F], Content [C], or Mixed [FC]) when rank < 3. Sixty-seven patients with left brain damage and 30 demographically matched healthy participants (HP) were studied. It was analyzed the correlation between Performance Rank and the three BAE factors and, recoding 3 as 0 and < 3 as 1, the sensitivity/specificity of this component for each factor. The effect of Type of Disorder on the three factors was analyzed. Results: 1) Performance Rank: Correlations of 0.84 (Expression), 0.81 (Comprehension), and 0.76 (Complementary) were observed, with a sensitivity and specificity ≥ 78% for any factor; 2) Type of Disorder: The performance significantly decreased from FC to C and from C to F in Expression (FC < C < F), from FC to C and from FC to F also in Comprehension and Complementary, from patients with any type of disorder to HP. Conclusion: Performance Rank was a relevant indicator of aphasia by its consistency with valid and comprehensive dimensions of acute language impairments. A degree difference between F and C was observed, being F a milder disorder; i.e., fluency problems were less severe than retrieval or anomia ones.
Keywords
Referencias
1 Vigliecca NS, Peñalva MC, Molina SC, Voos JA. Brief Aphasia Evaluation (minimum verbal performance): Concurrent and conceptual validity study in patients with unilateral cerebral lesions. Brain Inj. 2011;25(4):394-400. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/02699052.2011.556106 . PMid:21314276. [ Links ]
2 Vigliecca NS, Peñalva MC, Castillo JA, Molina SC, Voos JA, Ortiz MM, et al. Brief Aphasia Evaluation (minimum verbal performance): psychometric data in healthy participants from Argentina. J Neurosci Behav Health. 2011;3:16-26. [ Links ]
3 Vigliecca NS, Baez S. Verbal neuropsychological functions in aphasia: an integrative model. J Psycholinguist Res. 2015;44(6):715-32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10936-014-9316-4 . PMid:25168953. [ Links ]
4 Vigliecca NS. PsycTESTS: Brief Aphasia Evaluation (BAE) [Internet]. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2016 [cited 2018 Feb. 6]. Available from: http://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Ft16313-000 [ Links ]
5 Vigliecca NS. PsycTESTS: Evaluación Breve de la Afasia (EBA) [Internet]. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2016 [cited 2018 Feb. 6]. Available from: http://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Ft24812-000 [ Links ]
6 Vigliecca NS. Relationship between the caregiver’s report on the patient’s spontaneous-speech and the Brief Aphasia Evaluation. CoDAS. 2017;29(5):e20170035. PMid:29160336. [ Links ]
7 Andreasen NC. Scale for the assessment of thought, language, and communication TLC). Schizophr Bull. 1986;12(3):473-82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/schbul/12.3.473 . PMid:3764363. [ Links ]
8 Steenbergen M, Bächtiger A, Spörndli M, Steiner J. Measuring Political Deliberation: A Discourse Quality Index. Comp Eur Polit. 2003;1(1):21-48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.cep.6110002 . [ Links ]
9 Horton WS, Spieler DH, Shriberg E. A corpus analysis of patterns of age-related change in conversational speech. Psychol Aging. 2010;25(3):708-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0019424 . PMid:20677883. [ Links ]
10 Awad M, Warren JE, Scott SK, Turkheimer FE, Wise RJ. A common system for the comprehension and production of narrative speech. J Neurosci. 2007;27(43):11455-64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5257-06.2007 . PMid:17959788. [ Links ]
11 AbdulSabur NY, Xu Y, Liu S, Chow HM, Baxter M, Carson J, et al. Neural correlates and network connectivity underlying narrative production and comprehension: a combined fMRI and PET study. Cortex. 2014;57:107-27.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2014.01.017 . PMid:24845161. [ Links ]
12 Tsermentseli S, Leigh PN, Taylor LJ, Radunovic A, Catani M, Goldstein LH. Syntactic processing as a marker for cognitive impairment in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Amyotroph Lateral Scler Frontotemporal Degener. 2015;17(1-2):69-76. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/21678421.2015.1071397 . PMid:26312952. [ Links ]
13 Cohen AS, Renshaw TL, Mitchell KR, Kim Y. A psychometric investigation of “macroscopic” speech measures for clinical and psychological science. Behav Res Methods. 2016;48(2):475-86.http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13428-015-0584-1 . PMid:25862539. [ Links ]
14 Galeote M, Checa E, Sánchez-Palacios C, Sebastián E, Soto P. Adaptation of the MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventories for Spanish children with Down syndrome: validity and reliability data for vocabulary. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2016;25(3):371-80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/2015_AJSLP-15-0007 . PMid:27387223. [ Links ]
15 Mueller KD, Koscik RL, Turkstra LS, Riedeman SK, LaRue A, Clark LR, et al. Connected Language in Late Middle-Aged Adults at Risk for Alzheimer’s Disease. J Alzheimers Dis. 2016;54(4):1539-50.http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/JAD-160252 . PMid:27636838. [ Links ]
16 Efthymiopoulou E, Kasselimis DS, Ghika A, Kyrozis A, Peppas C, Evdokimidis I, et al. The effect of cortical and subcortical lesions on spontaneous expression of memory-encoded and emotionally infused information: Evidence for a role of the ventral stream. Neuropsychologia. 2017;101:115-20.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.05.010 . PMid:28495600. [ Links ]
17 Vigliecca NS. Neurocognitive implications of tangential speech in patients with focal brain damage. In: D'Onofrio G, Sancarlo D, Greco A, editors. Gerontology. London: InTechOpen. p. 191-220.http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.71904 . [ Links ]
18 Shewan CM, Kertesz A. Reliability and validity characteristics of the Western Aphasia Battery (WAB). J Speech Hear Disord. 1980;45(3):308-24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/jshd.4503.308 . PMid:7412225. [ Links ]
19 Hachioui H, Sandt-Koenderman M, Dippel D, Koudstaal P, Visch-Brink E. The ScreeLing: occurrence of linguistic deficits in acute aphasia post-stroke. J Rehabil Med. 2012;44(5):429-35.http://dx.doi.org/10.2340/16501977-0955 . PMid:22549651. [ Links ]
20 World Medical Association. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA. 2013;310(20):2191-4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.281053 . PMid:24141714. [ Links ]
21 Goodglass H, Kaplan E. Evaluación de la afasia y trastornos relacionados. Adaptación española. Madrid: Panamericana; 1996. [ Links ]
22 Miller N, Willmes K, De Bleser R. The psychometric properties of the English language version of the Aachen Aphasia Test (EAAT). Aphasiology. 2000;14(7):683-722. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/026870300410946 . [ Links ]
23 Grande M, Hussmann K, Bay E, Christoph S, Piefke M, Willmes K, et al. Basic parameters of spontaneous speech as a sensitive method for measuring change during the course of aphasia. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2008;43(4):408-26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13682820701685991 . PMid:18584418. [ Links ]
24 Gorno-Tempini ML, Hillis AE, Weintraub S, Kertesz A, Mendez M, Cappa SF, et al. Classification of primary progressive aphasia and its variants. Neurology. 2011;76(11):1006-14.http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0b013e31821103e6 . PMid:21325651. [ Links ]
25 Marjanovič-Umek L, Fekonja-Peklaj U, Podlesek A. Characteristics of early vocabulary and grammar development in Slovenian-speaking infants and toddlers: a CDI-adaptation study. J Child Lang. 2013;40(4):779-98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0305000912000244 . PMid:22863332. [ Links ]
26 Pedersen PM, Vinter K, Olsen TS. Aphasia after stroke: type, severity and prognosis. The Copenhagen aphasia study. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2004;17(1):35-43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000073896 . PMid:14530636. [ Links ]
27 Lazar RM, Minzer B, Antoniello D, Festa JR, Krakauer JW, Marshall RS. Improvement in aphasia scores after stroke is well predicted by initial severity. Stroke. 2010;41(7):1485-8.http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.109.577338 . PMid:20538700. [ Links ]
28 Forkel SJ, Thiebaut de Schotten M, Dell’Acqua F, Kalra L, Murphy DG, Williams SC, et al. Anatomical predictors of aphasia recovery: a tractography study of bilateral perisylvian language networks. Brain. 2014;137(Pt 7):2027-39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/brain/awu113 . PMid:24951631. [ Links ]
29 Rofes A, Talacchi A, Santini B, Pinna G, Nickels L, Bastiaanse R, et al. Language in individuals with left hemisphere tumors: is spontaneous speech analysis comparable to formal testing? J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2018;40(7):722-732. PMid:29383968. [ Links ]
30 Vigliecca NS, Baez S. Screening executive function and global cognition with the Nine-Card Sorting Test: healthy participant studies and ageing implications. Psychogeriatrics. 2015;15(3):163-70.http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/psyg.12104 . PMid:25736906. [ Links ]
Submitted date:
18/03/2018
Accepted date:
15/08/2018
Facebook
Google+
Twitter
LinkedIn
Mendeley
StumbleUpon
CiteULike
Reddit
Email