Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Treatment for Acquired Apraxia of Speech: A Systematic Review of Intervention Research Between 2004 and 2012
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Treatment for Acquired Apraxia of Speech: A Systematic Review of Intervention Research Between 2004 and 2012
Do you wish to request the book?
Treatment for Acquired Apraxia of Speech: A Systematic Review of Intervention Research Between 2004 and 2012
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Treatment for Acquired Apraxia of Speech: A Systematic Review of Intervention Research Between 2004 and 2012
2015
Overview
The aim was for the appointed committee of the Academy of Neurological Communication Disorders and Sciences to conduct a systematic review of published intervention studies of acquired apraxia of speech (AOS), updating the previous committee's review article from 2006.
A systematic search of 11 databases identified 215 articles, with 26 meeting inclusion criteria of (a) stating intention to measure effects of treatment on AOS and (b) data representing treatment effects for at least 1 individual stated to have AOS.
All studies involved within-participant experimental designs, with sample sizes of 1 to 44 (median = 1). Confidence in diagnosis was rated high to reasonable in 18 of 26 studies. Most studies (24/26) reported on articulatory-kinematic approaches; 2 applied rhythm/rate control methods. Six studies had sufficient experimental control for Class III rating according to the Clinical Practice Guidelines Process Manual (American Academy of Neurology, 2011), with 15 others satisfying all criteria for Class III except use of independent or objective outcome measurement.
The most important global clinical conclusion from this review is that the weight of evidence supports a strong effect for both articulatory-kinematic and rate/rhythm approaches to AOS treatment. The quantity of work, experimental rigor, and reporting of diagnostic criteria continue to improve and strengthen confidence in the corpus of research.
Publisher
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
Subject
