Is There a Research–Practice Dosage Gap in Aphasia Rehabilitation?

Author:

Cavanaugh Robert1,Kravetz Christina2ORCID,Jarold Lillian13,Quique Yina4ORCID,Turner Rose5ORCID,Evans William S.1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of Pittsburgh, PA

2. Centers for Rehab Services, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, PA

3. Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of South Carolina, Columbia

4. Center for Education in Health Sciences, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL

5. Health Sciences Library System, University of Pittsburgh, PA

Abstract

Purpose Aphasia intervention research aims to improve communication and quality of life outcomes for people with aphasia. However, few studies have evaluated the translation and implementation of evidence-based aphasia interventions to clinical practice. Treatment dosage may be difficult to translate to clinical settings, and a mismatch between dosage in research and clinical practice threatens to attenuate intervention effectiveness. The purpose of this study is to quantify a potential research–practice dosage gap in outpatient aphasia rehabilitation. Method This study utilized a two-part approach. First, we estimated clinical treatment dosage in an episode of care (i.e., treatment provided from outpatient assessment to discharge) via utilization in a regional provider in the United States. Second, we undertook a scoping review of aphasia interventions published from 2009 to 2019 to estimate the typical dosage used in the current aphasia literature. Results Outpatient clinical episodes of care included a median of 10 treatment sessions and a mean of 14.8 sessions (interquartile range: 5–20 sessions). Sessions occurred 1–2 times a week over 4–14 weeks. The median total hours of treatment was 7.5 hr (interquartile range: 3.75–15 hr). In contrast, published interventions administered a greater treatment dosage, consisting of a median of 20 hr of treatment (interquartile range: 12–30 hr) over the course of 15 sessions (interquartile range: 10–24 sessions) approximately 3 times per week. Conclusions Results demonstrate a meaningful research–practice dosage gap, particularly in total treatment hours and weekly treatment intensity. This gap highlights the potential for attenuation of effectiveness from research to outpatient settings. Future translational research should consider clinical dosage constraints and take steps to facilitate intervention implementation, particularly with regard to dosage. Conversely, health care advocacy and continued development of alternative delivery methods are necessary for the successful implementation of treatments with dosage that is incompatible with current clinical contexts. Pragmatic, implementation-focused trials are recommended to evaluate and optimize treatment effectiveness in outpatient clinical settings. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.15161568

Publisher

American Speech Language Hearing Association

Subject

Speech and Hearing,Linguistics and Language,Developmental and Educational Psychology,Otorhinolaryngology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3