Refine
Document Type
- Article (3)
Language
- English (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
- rehabilitation (3) (remove)
Institute
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Neurologie (3) (remove)
Publisher
One of the great challenges the world faces in terms of health care is the increasing number of
people living with neuro-disabilities that affect their ability to participate in societal activities.
Various neurological conditions such as stroke, multiple sclerosis, or Parkinson’s disease, to name
just a few, change cognitive, sensory, or motor capacities, alter the emotional well-being of those
affected, and lead to disability in their everyday lives.
Over the last few decades, aging populations and reduced mortality in many regions of the world
have increased the number of people living with neuro-disabilities considerably, an effect that is
still ongoing (1): for 2017, the worldwide prevalence of stroke (thousands) has been estimated to
be as high as 104178.7 (95% confidence interval, 95% CI 98454.0–110125.0), and years lived with
disabilities (YLD) (counts in thousands) caused by stroke were reported to amount to 18695.4
(95% CI 13,574–23686.9). The stroke-related increase in YLD (percentage change in counts)
was 40% (95% CI 38.4–41.4) from 1990 to 2007 and another 43.6% (39.6–47.8) during only 10
years from 2007 to 2017. The numbers are similarly impressive for other neurological disorders
(i.e., dementias, Parkinson’s disease, epilepsy, multiple sclerosis, motor neuron disease, headache
disorders, and others). Taken together, their worldwide prevalence (in thousands) in 2017 was
3121435.3 (95% CI 2951124.5–3316268.0), while YLD (thousands) in 2017 were 3121435.3 (95%
CI 2951124.5–3316268.0), with an increase in YLD by 35.1% (95% CI 31.9–38.1) from 1990 to 2007
and by a further 17.8% (95% CI 15.8–20.2) from 2007 to 2017.
These numbers not only demonstrate the huge global burden of disease and prevailing
neuro-disabilities, but they indicate a considerable increase in the number of people living with
neuro-disabilities with an accelerating dynamic over time (for stroke).
Background
While meta-analyses confirm treatment for chronic post-stroke aphasia is effective, a lack of comparative evidence for different interventions limits prescription accuracy. We investigated whether Constraint-Induced Aphasia Therapy Plus (CIAT-plus) and/or Multimodality Aphasia Therapy (M-MAT) provided greater therapeutic benefit compared with usual community care and were differentially effective according to baseline aphasia severity.
Methods
We conducted a three-arm, multicentre, parallel group, open-label, blinded endpoint, phase III, randomised-controlled trial. We stratified eligible participants by baseline aphasia on the Western Aphasia Battery-Revised Aphasia Quotient (WAB-R-AQ). Groups of three participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to 30 hours of CIAT-Plus or M-MAT or to usual care (UC). Primary outcome was change in aphasia severity (WAB-R-AQ) from baseline to therapy completion analysed in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary outcomes included word retrieval, connected speech, functional communication, multimodal communication, quality of life and costs.
Results
We analysed 201 participants (70 in CIAT-Plus, 70 in M-MAT and 61 in UC). Aphasia severity was not significantly different between groups at postintervention: 1.05 points (95% CI −0.78 to 2.88; p=0.36) UC group vs CIAT-Plus; 1.06 points (95% CI −0.78 to 2.89; p=0.36) UC group vs M-MAT; 0.004 points (95% CI −1.76 to 1.77; p=1.00) CIAT-Plus vs M-MAT. Word retrieval, functional communication and communication-related quality of life were significantly improved following CIAT-Plus and M-MAT. Word retrieval benefits were maintained at 12-week follow-up.
Conclusions
CIAT-Plus and M-MAT were effective for word retrieval, functional communication, and quality of life, while UC was not. Future studies should explore predictive characteristics of responders and impacts of maintenance doses.
Trial registration number ACTRN 2615000618550.
Background: Intensive speech-language therapy (SLT) can promote recovery from chronic post-stroke aphasia, a major consequence of stroke. However, effect sizes of intensive SLT are moderate, potentially reflecting a physiological limit of training-induced progress. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is an easy-to-use, well-tolerated and low-cost approach that may enhance effectiveness of intensive SLT. In a recent phase-II randomized controlled trial, 26 individuals with chronic post-stroke aphasia received intensive SLT combined with anodal-tDCS of the left primary motor cortex (M1), resulting in improved naming and proxy-rated communication ability, with medium-to-large effect sizes.
Aims: The proposed protocol seeks to establish the incremental benefit from anodal-tDCS of M1 in a phase-III randomized controlled trial with adequate power, ecologically valid outcomes, and evidence-based SLT.
Methods: The planned study is a prospective randomized placebo-controlled (using sham-tDCS), parallel-group, double-blind, multi-center, phase-III superiority trial. A sample of 130 individuals with aphasia at least 6 months post-stroke will be recruited in more than 18 in- and outpatient rehabilitation centers.
Outcomes: The primary outcome focuses on communication ability in chronic post-stroke aphasia, as revealed by changes on the Amsterdam-Nijmegen Everyday Language Test (A-scale; primary endpoint: 6-month follow-up; secondary endpoints: immediately after treatment, and 12-month follow-up). Secondary outcomes include measures assessing linguistic-executive skills, attention, memory, emotional well-being, quality of life, health economic costs, and adverse events (endpoints: 6-month follow-up, immediately after treatment, and 12-month follow-up).
Discussion: Positive results will increase the quality of life for persons with aphasia and their families while reducing societal costs. After trial completion, a workshop with relevant stakeholders will ensure transfer into best-practice guidelines and successful integration within clinical routine.
Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT03930121.