Ethical and Practical Challenges of the Communication and Behavioral Manifestations of Primary Progressive Aphasia

Augmenting Verb-Naming Therapy With Neuromodulation Decelerates Language Loss in Primary Progressive Aphasia

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study was to evaluate Verb Network Strengthening Treatment (VNeST) paired with the transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the left inferior frontal gyrus, which was compared to VNeST paired with a sham stimulation in primary progressive aphasia (PPA).

METHOD

A double-blind, within-subject, sham-controlled crossover design was used. Eight participants with PPA were enrolled. Participants were enrolled in two treatment phases, one with VNeST plus real tDCS and one with VNeST plus sham. Participants received fifteen 1-hr sessions of VNeST in each phase. Linear mixed-effects models were used to compare changes between baseline and two follow-up time points (1 week and 8 weeks posttreatment) in naming trained verbs, untrained verbs, and untrained nouns; sentence production and comprehension; and producing content units and complete utterances in discourse.

RESULTS

VNeST was effective for significantly improving naming trained verbs and producing more complete utterances in discourse at 1 week posttreatment in both tDCS and sham conditions. A significant tDCS advantage yielded generalization of treatment effects to untrained verbs (at 1 week and 8 weeks posttreatment), sentence production (at 1 week posttreatment), and sentence comprehension (at 8 weeks posttreatment). Untrained verb naming and sentence comprehension declined when VNeST was not augmented with tDCS.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings provide emerging evidence that VNeST paired with tDCS can improve word finding, and other language abilities, in people with PPA. VNeST without neuromodulation can improve trained verb naming, but untrained verbs will likely decline faster when VNeST is not augmented with tDCS. Future research is required with a larger sample size to continue investigating the potential of treating word finding with VNeST and tDCS in PPA.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.27914325.

Systematic review of international ethics knowledge in the speech-language pathology literature (1980-2022)

PURPOSE

A systematic review was conducted to describe various viewpoints expressed in speech-language pathology literature over four decades concerning ethics knowledge in the profession.

METHOD

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were employed. Our sample search encompassed peer-reviewed journal articles sourced from electronic databases including MEDLINE, CINAHL, ERIC, MasterFILE Premier, E-Journals, Africa-Wide Information, and Academic Search Premier, spanning the period from 1980 to 2022.

RESULT

The initial search of articles identified 139 papers. After applying rigorous inclusion and exclusion criteria, 60 full-text papers were deemed suitable for inclusion. We conducted a qualitative, deductive analysis of the relevant data and findings. Studies primarily concentrated on the speech-language pathologist's roles in rehabilitation/management and education, research, and administration. A predominant focus of these papers revolved around moral judgement, a fundamental component of moral behaviour.

CONCLUSION

Findings suggest an evolving landscape within the speech-language pathology discipline, with an increased focus on moral judgement, professional competency, and rehabilitation/management. The findings highlight a consistent need for further development and emphasis on ethics in education, research, administration, and advocacy/consultation roles. This underscores the necessity for ongoing ethical education and support to ensure practitioners are well-equipped to navigate the complex ethical landscape of their professional practice.

"Please Don't Assess Him to Destruction": The R.A.I.S.E. Assessment Framework for Primary Progressive Aphasia

PURPOSE

Speech-language pathologists (SLPs) assess people with primary progressive aphasia (PPA) through measurements of speech, language, communication, and well-being, with the aims of identifying challenges and strengths, monitoring change, and informing treatment directions and supports. The purpose of this clinical focus article is to highlight the necessity for person-centered assessment specific to PPA and to conceptualize a framework that acknowledges the multifaceted nature of assessment for this population. In this framework, the unique challenges posed by a diagnosis of PPA are addressed with the aim to provide practical guidance for clinicians and to support reflection on current practices.

METHOD

In clinical and research practice, assessment of people with PPA requires an ever-evolving approach that is centered on the client. In this clinical focus article, a discussion-based consensus process was used to synthesize authentic longitudinal experiences of people with PPA to explore assessment approaches, tools, and philosophies.

RESULTS

This analysis of person-centered assessment identifies seven essential components of assessment in PPA that set the foundation for the five steps of the R.A.I.S.E. Assessment framework. These components each contribute to a clear definition of assessment that reveals clients' competencies with a strengths-based focus; prioritizes the reciprocity of benefits; promotes dynamic assessment; and recognizes the complexity, evolution of assessment over time, and advocacy.

CONCLUSIONS

This clinical focus article takes a novel look at assessment in PPA by stepping away from assessment practices that focus on revealing deficits and decline and, instead, provides practical recommendations through the conceptualization of a PPA-specific assessment framework. The R.A.I.S.E. Assessment framework is grounded in principles of uplifting clients through person-centered assessment, keeps pace with best practice in PPA intervention, and contributes to a supportive experience for clients and families in the face of a progressive diagnosis over time.

Clinical and neuroimaging characteristics of primary progressive aphasia

The chapter covers the clinical syndrome of a primary progressive aphasia (PPA), the demographics of this rare neurodegenerative disease, defining clinical and neuroanatomic characteristics of each PPA variant, disease progression, and behavioral features. The chapter begins with a brief introduction that includes references to seminal papers that defined this clinical syndrome and its three variants. The classic PPA subtypes discussed in the chapter are semantic variant PPA (svPPA), nonfluent/agrammatic PPA (nfaPPA), and logopenic variant PPA (lvPPA). The key language and cognitive characteristics, and language tasks that can elicit these language impairments, are detailed. Overlap in the clinical profiles of the PPA variants, which make differential diagnosis challenging, are explained. Disease progression is described, revealing that the PPA variants become more similar over time. Although PPA is language-predominant dementia, there are behavioral manifestations, particularly in svPPA. Changes in behavior in this variant are addressed as well as behavioral changes in nfaPPA and lvPPA that are less well recognized. The patterns of atrophy in the left temporal, parietal, and/or frontal cortices unique to each PPA variant are described. The underlying neuropathologies of the PPA variants are discussed, specifically tauopathies and non-tauopathies associated with svPPA and nfaPPA and Alzheimer's disease pathology in lvPPA.