Treatment of sound errors in aphasia and apraxia of speech: Effects of phonological complexity

Background: Recent research suggests that the complexity of treatment stimuli influences the effectiveness of treatment. However, no studies have examined the role of complexity on sound production treatment in adult individuals with sound production impairments. Aims: This study examines effects of syllable complexity on treatment outcome in two patients with acquired sound production problems. Complexity is defined in terms of syllable structure: clusters are more complex than singletons. Using a single-subject multiplebaseline design, we address the question: Is treatment of complex syllables more effective than treatment of simple syllables? Methods & Procedures: Two patients with aphasia and apraxia of speech were trained to produce complex or simple syllables (using modelling). Improvement was measured by percent correct on a word and nonword repetition test. Outcomes & Results: We found that both treatment on simple syllables and treatment on complex syllables led to improved production of simple syllables, while treatment of complex syllables also led to improvement on some complex syllables for one of the two patients. Conclusions: These results suggests that training complex items is more effective than training simple items, at least for some patients. Possible reasons for lack of stronger effects are discussed, as well as directions for future research.

[1]  L P Shapiro Tutorial: an introduction to syntax. , 1997, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[2]  K. Ballard Response generalization in apraxia of speech treatments: taking another look. , 2001, Journal of communication disorders.

[3]  Robert D. van Valin,et al.  An Introduction to Syntax , 2001 .

[4]  G. Clements Papers in Laboratory Phonology: The role of the sonority cycle in core syllabification , 1990 .

[5]  Kirrie J. Ballard,et al.  Understanding the nature of apraxia of speech: Theory, analysis, and treatment , 2000 .

[6]  I. T. Draper THE ASSESSMENT OF APHASIA AND RELATED DISORDERS , 1973 .

[7]  K. Ballard,et al.  The role of syntactic complexity in training wh-movement structures in agrammatic aphasia: Optimal order for promoting generalization , 1998, Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society.

[8]  R. Burchfield Frequency Analysis of English Usage: Lexicon and Grammar. By W. Nelson Francis and Henry Kučera with the assistance of Andrew W. Mackie. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 1982. x + 561 , 1985 .

[9]  P. Doyle,et al.  Effects of treatment for sound errors in apraxia of speech and aphasia. , 1998, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[10]  J. Wambaugh,et al.  Effects of rate and rhythm control treatment on consonant production accuracy in apraxia of speech , 2000 .

[11]  J. Gierut,et al.  Treatment efficacy: functional phonological disorders in children. , 1998, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[12]  Lewis P. Shapiro,et al.  TrainingWh-Question Production in Agrammatic Aphasia: Analysis of Argument and Adjunct Movement , 1996, Brain and Language.

[13]  Timothy D. Lee,et al.  Motor Control and Learning: A Behavioral Emphasis , 1982 .

[14]  John Kingston,et al.  Between the grammar and physics of speech , 1994 .

[15]  J. Gierut Syllable onsets: clusters and adjuncts in acquisition. , 1999, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[16]  Chris Code,et al.  Models, theories and heuristics in apraxia of speech , 1998 .

[17]  A. Benton The Assessment of Aphasia and Related Disorders , 1973, Neurology.

[18]  D. Dinnsen,et al.  Stimulability as a factor in the phonological generalization of misarticulating preschool children. , 1991, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[19]  D. Dinnsen,et al.  On the prediction of phonologic generalization learning patterns. , 1984, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.

[20]  P. Doyle,et al.  Treatment for apraxia of speech: Effects of targeting sound groups , 1998 .

[21]  L P Shapiro,et al.  Training and generalized production of wh- and NP-movement structures in agrammatic aphasia. , 1997, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[22]  Judith A. Gierut,et al.  Complexity in Phonological Treatment: Clinical Factors. , 2001, Language, speech, and hearing services in schools.

[23]  Sandra P. Whiteside,et al.  What is the underlying impairment in acquired apraxia of speech , 2001 .

[24]  K P Kearns,et al.  Flexibility of single-subject experimental designs. Part II: Design selection and arrangement of experimental phases. , 1986, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.

[25]  M. Elbert,et al.  Generalization following the remediation of early- and later-developing consonant clusters. , 1984, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.

[26]  C K Thompson,et al.  Treatment and generalization of complex sentence production in agrammatism. , 1999, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[27]  J W Folkins,et al.  Speech timing in apraxia of speech versus conduction aphasia. , 1996, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[28]  M. McNeil,et al.  Sound production treatment for apraxia of speech: overgeneralization and maintenance effects , 1999 .

[29]  R. Schmidt,et al.  Influence of order of stimulus presentation on speech motor learning: A principled approach to treatment for apraxia of speech , 2000 .

[30]  H. Storkel,et al.  Planning speech one syllable at a time: the reduced buffer capacity hypothesis in apraxia of speech , 1999 .