Augmentative and alternative communication for individuals with post-stroke aphasia: perspectives of South African speech-language pathologists.

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q1 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY
Inge Odendaal, Kerstin M Tönsing
{"title":"Augmentative and alternative communication for individuals with post-stroke aphasia: perspectives of South African speech-language pathologists.","authors":"Inge Odendaal, Kerstin M Tönsing","doi":"10.1080/07434618.2024.2374303","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This qualitative study aimed to describe speech-language pathologists' (SLPs') perspectives on augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) use for people with post-stroke aphasia focusing on: (a) current AAC practice, (b) factors that influence the use of AAC, and (c) the success and relevance of AAC interventions. Semi-structured interviews took place with ten South African SLPs with experience in aphasia intervention. The transcribed interviews were thematically analyzed using a six-phase process of inductive and deductive analysis within a phenomenological framework. All the participants use AAC with their clients, employing a variety of approaches that reflect their diverse settings, experiences, and perspectives on AAC. AAC use is complex, and SLPs make conscious choices considering multiple factors. Barriers to use were often associated with limited resources in the low- and middle-income country (LMIC) context, but most participants retained a positive view of AAC, actively working to circumvent barriers to use. Participants consistently emphasized the vital role of partners in communication interactions, linked to the importance of defining AAC broadly. It is necessary to advance the integration of AAC into rehabilitation plans to improve communication and social participation outcomes for people with post-stroke aphasia, especially in LMICs such as South Africa.</p>","PeriodicalId":49234,"journal":{"name":"Augmentative and Alternative Communication","volume":" ","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Augmentative and Alternative Communication","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07434618.2024.2374303","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This qualitative study aimed to describe speech-language pathologists' (SLPs') perspectives on augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) use for people with post-stroke aphasia focusing on: (a) current AAC practice, (b) factors that influence the use of AAC, and (c) the success and relevance of AAC interventions. Semi-structured interviews took place with ten South African SLPs with experience in aphasia intervention. The transcribed interviews were thematically analyzed using a six-phase process of inductive and deductive analysis within a phenomenological framework. All the participants use AAC with their clients, employing a variety of approaches that reflect their diverse settings, experiences, and perspectives on AAC. AAC use is complex, and SLPs make conscious choices considering multiple factors. Barriers to use were often associated with limited resources in the low- and middle-income country (LMIC) context, but most participants retained a positive view of AAC, actively working to circumvent barriers to use. Participants consistently emphasized the vital role of partners in communication interactions, linked to the importance of defining AAC broadly. It is necessary to advance the integration of AAC into rehabilitation plans to improve communication and social participation outcomes for people with post-stroke aphasia, especially in LMICs such as South Africa.

针对中风后失语症患者的辅助和替代性交流:南非语言病理学家的观点。
这项定性研究旨在描述语言病理学家(SLPs)对脑卒中后失语症患者使用辅助和替代性交流(AAC)的看法,重点关注:(a)当前的辅助和替代性交流实践,(b)影响辅助和替代性交流使用的因素,以及(c)辅助和替代性交流干预的成功性和相关性。研究人员与十名具有失语症干预经验的南非语言康复师进行了半结构式访谈。在现象学框架内,采用六阶段归纳和演绎分析方法对转录的访谈内容进行了主题分析。所有参与者都对其客户使用了 AAC,并采用了各种方法,反映了他们不同的环境、经验和对 AAC 的看法。AAC 的使用是复杂的,SLP 会在考虑多种因素后做出有意识的选择。使用障碍通常与中低收入国家(LMIC)的资源有限有关,但大多数参与者对 AAC 持积极态度,并积极努力克服使用障碍。与会者一致强调合作伙伴在交流互动中的重要作用,这与广义定义人工辅助器具的重要性有关。有必要推动将辅助交流技术纳入康复计划,以改善卒中后失语症患者的交流和社会参与效果,尤其是在南非等低收入和中等收入国家。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Augmentative and Alternative Communication
Augmentative and Alternative Communication AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
15.00%
发文量
25
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: As the official journal of the International Society for Augmentative and Alternative Communication (ISAAC), Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) publishes scientific articles related to the field of augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) that report research concerning assessment, treatment, rehabilitation, and education of people who use or have the potential to use AAC systems; or that discuss theory, technology, and systems development relevant to AAC. The broad range of topic included in the Journal reflects the development of this field internationally. Manuscripts submitted to AAC should fall within one of the following categories, AND MUST COMPLY with associated page maximums listed on page 3 of the Manuscript Preparation Guide. Research articles (full peer review), These manuscripts report the results of original empirical research, including studies using qualitative and quantitative methodologies, with both group and single-case experimental research designs (e.g, Binger et al., 2008; Petroi et al., 2014). Technical, research, and intervention notes (full peer review): These are brief manuscripts that address methodological, statistical, technical, or clinical issues or innovations that are of relevance to the AAC community and are designed to bring the research community’s attention to areas that have been minimally or poorly researched in the past (e.g., research note: Thunberg et al., 2016; intervention notes: Laubscher et al., 2019).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信