Skip to content

Effectiveness of Intensive Aphasia Therapy Under Routine Clinical Conditions

From Controlled Experimental Trial to Everyday Communication: How Effective is Intensive Aphasia Therapy Under Routine Clinical Conditions?

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01540383
Acronym
FCET2EC
Enrollment
156
Registered
2012-02-28
Start date
2012-04-01
Completion date
2015-01-01
Last updated
2026-04-30

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Aphasia, Stroke

Keywords

Communication, Language, Treatment, Intervention, Therapy, Efficacy, Maintenance, Recovery, Outcome, Rehabilitation, Treatment Intensity, Language Impairment, Intensive Language Therapy, Functional Communication, Functional Improvement, Evidence-Based Intervention, High-Frequency

Brief summary

The purpose of this study is to examine whether 3 weeks of intensive language therapy provided in clinical in- and outpatient settings is effective in improving everyday communication in postacute/chronic post-stroke aphasia, as measured by performance on the Amsterdam Nijmegen Everyday Language Test (ANELT).

Detailed description

Aims of the study: This multicenter randomized placebo-controlled study aims to examine whether integrative intensive (\> 10 hours/week for at least 3 weeks) language and communication therapy administered under routine clinical conditions translates into a statistically significant functional improvement of everyday communication in patients with chronic aphasia (i.e., aphasia persisting for 6 or more months after the stroke). A further aim is to examine whether therapy-induced improvements are still maintained over a period of six months. The study's results may lead to more targeted treatment regimens and thus to an enhancement of health-related quality of life in persons with chronic aphasia. The data will further provide evidence-based guidelines of best practice in the rehabilitation of persons with chronic aphasia. Methods: Fourteen in- and outpatient rehabilitation centres across Germany participate in the study. Via a digital randomization procedure, patients are allocated to one of two groups: an experimental group, starting as soon as feasible with treatment lasting 3 to 6 weeks, and a waiting list control group, whose therapy begins after a three-week delay. Both groups receive a combination of language systematic and communicative-pragmatic language therapy. Everyday language ability will be examined with a standardized outcome measure, and compared between groups at several points: immediately before as well as immediately after and 6 months after completion of (3-6 weeks) intensive language therapy. Statistical analyses: The primary analysis compares the changes in functional communication ability (as indicated by changes of pre- to post-therapy functional communication scores on the primary outcome measure, the ANELT) between the experimental and the waiting list control group in an intention-to-treat (ITT) design. To balance for unequal treatment durations across patient ("naturalistic treatment setting"), the critical pre- to post therapy interval is fixed at three weeks, with the option of extension of therapy (provided it is granted by the sickness fund) and re-test after termination of therapy. The long-term stability of potential treatment gains will be re-evaluated 6 months post therapy. Further exploratory analyses will examine therapy-induced changes in secondary outcome measures (see below) in the experimental compared to the waiting list control group. Considering that age, gender, time post stroke onset, aphasia type (fluent, non-fluent), aphasia severity (based on the Aachen Aphasia Test \[AAT\] profile score), baseline cognitive status, the total hours of therapy provided, type of stroke (cortical strokes with or without subcortical involvement), the amount of therapy-concomitant self-administered language practice (e.g. computer-aided practice), and concurrent physio- and neuropsychological therapies might influence functional outcome, the above factors will be included in a multivariate analysis with variable selection. The amount of outpatient therapy provided after discharge from intensive treatment will be statistically controlled by covariate analyses. Finally, the investigators expect that therapy effects in the waiting list control group will be comparable to those of the experimental group. Thus, after initiation of therapy in the control group after a three-week delay, outcome data will be collected in analogy to the experimental group, and will serve to replicate potential effects of intensive language therapy under routine clinical conditions.

Interventions

BEHAVIORALIntensive integrative aphasia therapy

Intensive language therapy (3 weeks, 5 days/week, \>=2 hours/day) provided in regular clinical setting and consisting of a combination of language systematic and communicative-pragmatic treatment

Control group starts intensive language therapy after a 3-week waiting period.

Sponsors

University Hospital Muenster
Lead SponsorOTHER
Fresenius University of Applied Science
CollaboratorOTHER
Charite University, Berlin, Germany
CollaboratorOTHER
Entwicklungsgruppe Klinische Neuropsychologie, Klinikum Bogenhausen, München
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
Institut für Biometrie und Klinische Epidemiologie, Charité Campus Benjamin Franklin, Berlin
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
RWTH Aachen University
CollaboratorOTHER
Bundesverband für die Rehabilitation der Aphasiker e.V.
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
Universitätsklinikum Leipzig
CollaboratorOTHER
MEDIAN Klinik Grünheide
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
Brandenburgklinik Berlin-Brandenburg GmbH
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
St. Mauritius Therapieklinik
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
Aphasie- und Seniorenzentrum Josef Bergmann Vechta
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
Behandlungs- und Rehabilitationszentrum für Intensiv-Therapie Lindlar
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
Wickerklinik Bad Homburg v.d.H.
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
Asklepios Neurological Clinic Falkenstein
CollaboratorOTHER
Akademische Praxis für Sprachtherapie / Praxis für Rehabilitationswesen Aschaffenburg
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
Städtisches Klinikum München, Klinikum Bogenhausen
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
Schoen Clinic Bad Aibling
CollaboratorOTHER
m&i-Fachklinik Bad Liebenstein
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
m&i-Fachklinik Enzensberg
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
m&i-Fachklinik Herzogenaurach
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
mediclin Klinikum Soltau
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
Moritz Klinik, Bad Klosterlausnitz
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
Klinikum Christophsbad, Göppingen
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
P.A.N.-Zentrum
CollaboratorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 70 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* presence of aphasia for at least 6 months after non-hemorrhagic or hemorrhagic cortical or subcortical-cortical stroke * native language German * participant's comprehension ability needs to be sufficiently high to give informed consent * participant's language abilities have to allow the administration of the Aachen Aphasia Test (AAT)

Exclusion criteria

* aphasia due to non-vascular etiology * no evidence for aphasia (based on AAT subtests 'Token Test' and 'Written Language' * severe untreated medical conditions which prohibit participation in intensive language therapy * severe vision or hearing problems (uncorrected) * participation in another interventional or language therapy study within four weeks before potential enrollment

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Changes on the Amsterdam Nijmegen Everyday Language Test (ANELT) - A-scaleBaseline is compared to performance immediately and 6 months post 3 weeks of intensive language therapy. Patients with at least 5 weeks of therapy, performance will also be assessed after therapy completion (on average 6 weeks)Mean gain in ANELT understandability scores (ANELT A-scale; using the parallel versions ANELT-I and ANELT-II)

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
morbidity measure: changes in language-systematic aphasia screening (SAPS)Baseline is compared to performance immediately and 6 months post 3 weeks of intensive language therapy. Patients with at least 5 weeks of therapy, performance will also be assessed after therapy completion (on average 6 weeks)Changes from pre- to post therapy of scores on: a (yet unpublished) test to assess language performance in 2 language modalities (perception, production) and 3 language levels (phonological, lexical, morphosyntactic). There are 3 different levels of complexity for each combination of modality and language level. Performance is thus assessed in 18 language domains (2x3x3).
morbidity measure: changes in communicative-pragmatic screening (KOPS)Baseline is compared to performance immediately and 6 months post 3 weeks of intensive language therapy. Patients with at least 5 weeks of therapy, performance will also be assessed after therapy completion (on average 6 weeks)Changes from pre- to post therapy of scores on: an (yet unpublished) test measuring verbal and nonverbal performance in daily life communicative activities of increasing complexity
morbidity measure: changes in Modified Rankin ScaleBaseline is compared to performance immediately and 6 months post 3 weeks of intensive language therapy. Patients with at least 5 weeks of therapy, performance will also be assessed after therapy completion (on average 6 weeks)Changes from pre- to post therapy of scores in: the degree of disability or dependence in daily activities
quality of life measure: changes in German version of the Stroke and Aphasia Quality of Life Scale-39 (SAQOL-39)Baseline is compared to performance immediately and 6 months post 3 weeks of intensive language therapy. Patients with at least 5 weeks of therapy, performance will also be assessed after therapy completion (on average 6 weeks)Changes from pre- to post therapy of scores on: Health-related quality of life questionnaire adapted for persons with aphasia
quality of life measure: changes in Communicative Effectiveness Index (CETI) and the ANELT partner communication questionnaireBaseline is compared to performance 6 months post 3 weeks of intensive language therapy.Changes from pre- to post therapy of scores on: ratings of functional communication ability by relatives of persons with aphasia
morbidity measure: changes in nonverbal cognitive functionsBaseline is compared to performance immediately and 6 months post 3 weeks of intensive language therapy. Patients with at least 5 weeks of therapy, performance will also be assessed after therapy completion (on average 6 weeks)Changes from pre- to post therapy of scores on: * Nonverbal Learning Test (NVLT) * Trail Making Test * Verbal Fluency Test
quality of life measure: changes in Visual analog mood scales (VAMS)Baseline is compared to performance immediately and 6 months post 3 weeks of intensive language therapy. Patients with at least 5 weeks of therapy, performance will also be assessed after therapy completion (on average 6 weeks)Changes from pre- to post therapy of scores on: assessment of mood visual analog scales (adapted for persons with aphasia)
changes in Amsterdam-Nijmegen Everyday Language Test (ANELT) - B-scaleBaseline is compared to performance immediately and 6 months post 3 weeks of intensive language therapy. Patients with at least 5 weeks of therapy, performance will also be assessed after therapy completion (on average 6 weeks)Mean gain in ANELT intelligibility scores (ANELT B-scale; using the parallel versions ANELT-I and ANELT-II)
changes in Amsterdam-Nijmegen Everyday Language Test (ANELT) - syntactic ratingBaseline is compared to performance immediately and 6 months post 3 weeks of intensive language therapy. Patients with at least 5 weeks of therapy, performance will also be assessed after therapy completion (on average 6 weeks)Mean gain in syntactic rating scores (syntax rating criteria based on AAT subtest "spontaneous speech") for the ANELT scenarios (using the parallel versions ANELT-I and ANELT-II)
changes in Amsterdam-Nijmegen Everyday Language Test (ANELT) - nonverbal communication ratingBaseline is compared to performance immediately and 6 months post 3 weeks of intensive language therapy. Patients with at least 5 weeks of therapy, performance will also be assessed after therapy completion (on average 6 weeks)Mean gain in nonverbal rating scores (criteria based on "Scenario Test") for the ANELT scenarios (using the parallel versions ANELT-I and ANELT-II)

Countries

Germany

Contacts

PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORAnnette Baumgaertner, PhD

Hochschule Fresenius University of Applied Science

PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORCaterina Breitenstein, PhD

Neurology, University of Muenster

STUDY_DIRECTORAgnes Floel, MD

Neurology, Universitätsmedizin Charite, CCM, Berlin

PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORWolfram Ziegler, PhD

Clinical Neuropsychology Research Group (EKN), Klinikum Bogenhausen, München

PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORTanja Grewe, PhD

Hochschule Fresenius University of Applied Sciences

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: May 1, 2026