Aphasia, Stroke
Conditions
Keywords
aphasia, stroke, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Brief summary
The study will use MRI brain imaging to identify brain changes associated in stroke patients after they receive speech-language treatment for their speech difficulties.
Detailed description
The goals of the current study are to identify grey and white matter regions that are predictive of speech treatment response and measure neural plasticity in response to speech treatment, using state-of-the-art neuroimaging and statistical processing techniques in a group of well-characterized left hemisphere patients meeting strict inclusionary criteria. Specifically, the investigators will use voxel-based lesion symptom mapping to identify lesion sites most predictive of a positive response to speech treatment and advanced diffusion imaging techniques to map changes in the integrity of white matter tracts from pre- to post-treatment.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALSpeech Production Treatment
This treatment employs a response-contingent hierarchy made up of verbal modeling/repetition, graphic cueing, integral stimulation, and articulatory placement instruction.
Sponsors
VA Office of Research and Development
Study design
Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
BASIC_SCIENCE
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
40 Years to 90 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Inclusion criteria are age 40-90 * primary English speaker since \< age 5 * a history of a single left hemisphere stroke * at least 1 year post-stroke * at least 12 years of education * pre-morbidly right-handed (Edinburgh Handedness Questionnaire) * within normal limits on the Test of Non-Verbal Intelligence
Exclusion criteria
*
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change From Baseline in Percent of Trained Items Correctly Repeated | 8 weeks | For each participant, three target sounds were chosen: single consonants, vowels, or clusters at the word level. Based on these target sounds, 10 word items were generated for each target sound that served as Trained Items. Participants were tested on lists of Trained Items (probe trials) during repeated sessions in pre-intervention stage to establish baseline performance (percent of each word list repeated correctly) and during every other treatment session (again, percent of each word list repeated correctly). The change in percent correct list repetition from pre-intervention (5 probe trials) to the end of intervention (final 3 probe trials) was calculated as individual treatment effect sizes using the Busk & Serlin (1992) d2 statistic, which involves subtracting the difference between mean performance at end of the intervention minus pre-intervention, divided by the pooled standard deviation of the two phases. The larger the d2 effect size, the larger the effect of the treatment. |
| Change From Baseline in Percent of Untrained Items Correctly Repeated | 8 weeks | To test generalization, we assessed the change in performance (percent correct repetition) on lists of 10 Untrained Items that had the same speech production targets as each patient's lists of 10 Trained Items, balanced for syllabic structure, word frequency, grammatical form class, and stress pattern. Just as for Trained Items, participants were tested on the lists of Untrained Items (probe trials) during repeated sessions in the pre-intervention stage to establish baseline performance and during every other treatment session (percent of each word list repeated correctly). The change in percent correct list repetition from pre-intervention (5 probe trials) to end of intervention (final 3 probe trials) was calculated as individual treatment effect sizes using the d2 statistic: the difference between mean performance at end of the intervention minus pre-intervention, divided by the pooled standard deviation. The larger the d2 effect size, the larger the effect of the treatment. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Percentage Change in Fractional Anisotropy (FA) | 8 weeks | To measure neuroplasticity associated with the speech treatment protocol, the investigators calculated the percent change in fractional anisotropy (FA) from pre- to post-treatment for each of the eight fiber tracts in the left hemisphere. The average percentage change in FA across all eight fiber tracts was calculated, which could thus range from 0-100%. A positive change indicates an increase in white matter integrity, and a negative change indicates a decrease in white matter integrity. A number close to 0 indicates minimal/no significant change. |
Countries
United States
Participant flow
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| Speech Production Treatment This treatment employs a response-contingent hierarchy made up of verbal modeling/repetition, graphic cueing, integral stimulation, and articulatory placement instruction. The investigators chose this treatment for the following reasons: 1) rigor of development demonstrated across multiple studies, 2) large and predictable effects with published, quantified effect sizes, 3) a demonstrated pattern of generalization to untrained items, illustrating experimental control, 4) an established multi-modal stimulation protocol, and 5) use of repeated practice, which is associated with neural plasticity.
Speech Production Treatment: This treatment employs a response-contingent hierarchy made up of verbal modeling/repetition, graphic cueing, integral stimulation, and articulatory placement instruction. | 10 |
| Total | 10 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | Speech Production Treatment |
|---|---|
| Age, Categorical <=18 years | 0 Participants |
| Age, Categorical >=65 years | 4 Participants |
| Age, Categorical Between 18 and 65 years | 6 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Hispanic or Latino | 0 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Not Hispanic or Latino | 10 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) American Indian or Alaska Native | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Asian | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Black or African American | 1 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) More than one race | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) White | 9 Participants |
| Region of Enrollment United States | 10 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Female | 2 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Male | 8 Participants |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk |
|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 0 / 17 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 0 / 17 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 0 / 17 |
Outcome results
Primary
Change From Baseline in Percent of Trained Items Correctly Repeated
For each participant, three target sounds were chosen: single consonants, vowels, or clusters at the word level. Based on these target sounds, 10 word items were generated for each target sound that served as Trained Items. Participants were tested on lists of Trained Items (probe trials) during repeated sessions in pre-intervention stage to establish baseline performance (percent of each word list repeated correctly) and during every other treatment session (again, percent of each word list repeated correctly). The change in percent correct list repetition from pre-intervention (5 probe trials) to the end of intervention (final 3 probe trials) was calculated as individual treatment effect sizes using the Busk & Serlin (1992) d2 statistic, which involves subtracting the difference between mean performance at end of the intervention minus pre-intervention, divided by the pooled standard deviation of the two phases. The larger the d2 effect size, the larger the effect of the treatment.
Time frame: 8 weeks
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Speech Production Treatment | Change From Baseline in Percent of Trained Items Correctly Repeated | 6.67 d2 treatment effect size | Standard Deviation 4.43 |
Primary
Change From Baseline in Percent of Untrained Items Correctly Repeated
To test generalization, we assessed the change in performance (percent correct repetition) on lists of 10 Untrained Items that had the same speech production targets as each patient's lists of 10 Trained Items, balanced for syllabic structure, word frequency, grammatical form class, and stress pattern. Just as for Trained Items, participants were tested on the lists of Untrained Items (probe trials) during repeated sessions in the pre-intervention stage to establish baseline performance and during every other treatment session (percent of each word list repeated correctly). The change in percent correct list repetition from pre-intervention (5 probe trials) to end of intervention (final 3 probe trials) was calculated as individual treatment effect sizes using the d2 statistic: the difference between mean performance at end of the intervention minus pre-intervention, divided by the pooled standard deviation. The larger the d2 effect size, the larger the effect of the treatment.
Time frame: 8 weeks
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Speech Production Treatment | Change From Baseline in Percent of Untrained Items Correctly Repeated | 2.66 d2 treatment effect size | Standard Deviation 4.39 |
Secondary
Percentage Change in Fractional Anisotropy (FA)
To measure neuroplasticity associated with the speech treatment protocol, the investigators calculated the percent change in fractional anisotropy (FA) from pre- to post-treatment for each of the eight fiber tracts in the left hemisphere. The average percentage change in FA across all eight fiber tracts was calculated, which could thus range from 0-100%. A positive change indicates an increase in white matter integrity, and a negative change indicates a decrease in white matter integrity. A number close to 0 indicates minimal/no significant change.
Time frame: 8 weeks
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Speech Production Treatment | Percentage Change in Fractional Anisotropy (FA) | -0.46 average percent change in FA | Standard Deviation 1.05 |