Assessment of individuals with aphasia: an integrative literature review
Avaliação de sujeitos com afasia: uma revisão integrativa da literatura
Emilyn Borba da Silva; Miriam Cabrera Corvelo Delboni; Elenir Fedosse
Abstract
Objective: to analyze which evaluations are used by occupational therapists, speechlanguage pathologists and physiotherapists on individuals presented with aphasia and what these evaluations address.
Methods: the study conducted a national and international documental analysis of evaluations used by professionals working on the neurological rehabilitation of adults and/or elderly individuals with aphasia, published in the last ten years (January 2008/ June 2018). This analysis was performed by an integrative review of databases LILACS, SciELO and PubMed, using the descriptors: Health Assessment or Testing, or Protocols, or Psychometrics, or Questionnaires and Rehabilitation, combined with the descriptors: Aphasia, Occupational Therapy, Speech-language Pathology and Physiotherapy.
Results: 26 studies were included, most of which were scored as level VI of scientific evidence; the years of 2013 and 2016 presented publication peaks. The studies used 54 evaluation tools, among which 13 were recurrent in the studies, mostly analyzing aspects of communication/language. It is assumed that these data are related to the fact that speech-language pathologists provide care for individuals with aphasia; however, these individuals may present other needs beyond communication, such as those related to human occupation, requiring multiprofessional and integral health care. Among the protocols, the Stroke Impact Scale (SIS) was considered the most complete, since it addresses communication, linguistic, human occupation and psycho-affective aspects.
Conclusion: this study identified the use of few instruments dedicated to individuals with aphasia related to all aspects that involve life, with predominance of protocols and evaluations that only address disabilities, highlighting the importance of assessments that address subjectivity, evaluating individuals with aphasia in all dimensions of their lives.
Keywords
Resumo
Objetivo: analisar quais e o que abordam as avaliações utilizadas com sujeitos com afasia pelos terapeutas ocupacionais, fonoaudiólogos e fisioterapeutas.
Métodos: o estudo realizou uma análise documental, nacional e internacional, das avaliações utilizadas pelos profissionais dedicados à reabilitação neurológica de sujeitos adultos e/ou idosos com afasia publicadas nos últimos dez anos (janeiro 2008/junho2018). Por meio de uma revisão integrativa nas bases de dados: LILACS, SciELO e PubMed, utilizando os descritores: Avaliação em Saúde ou Realização de Testes, ou Protocolos, ou Psicometria, ou Questionários e Reabilitação, combinados com os descritores: Afasia, Terapia Ocupacional, Fonoaudiologia e Fisioterapia.
Resultados: foram incluídos 26 estudos, a maior parte classificada em nível VI de evidência científica; os anos de 2013 e 2016 apresentaram picos de publicações. Os estudos utilizaram 54 instrumentos de avaliação, 13 recorrentes, os quais analisam, em sua maioria, aspectos da comunicação/linguísticos. Infere-se que tal dado esteja relacionado com o fato de fonoaudiólogos prestarem cuidados aos sujeitos com afasia; porém tais sujeitos podem apresentar necessidades para além da comunicação, como, por exemplo, as relacionadas à ocupação humana, sendo necessário, um cuidado multiprofissional e integral em saúde. O protocolo de avaliação Stroke Impact Scale (SIS) foi considerado, dentre os instrumentos, o mais completo, por abordar aspectos da comunicação/linguísticos, da ocupação humana e psicoafetivos.
Conclusão: este estudo identificou a utilização de poucos instrumentos dedicados a sujeitos com afasia relativos a todos os aspectos que envolvem a vida, com predominância dos protocolos e avaliações que direcionam apenas para as incapacidades, destacando a importância de avaliações que tratem da subjetividade, que avaliem o sujeito com afasia em todas as dimensões da sua vida.
Palavras-chave
References
1. Brasil. Lei n. 8.080, de 19 de setembro de 1990; Brasília: 1990. [Acesso em 30 de ago 2018]; Disponível em: http://prattein.com.br/home/ images/stories/Saude/Lei-org-saude.pdf.
2. Bergamaschi FPR, Teles AS, Souza ACS, Nakatami AYK. Reflexões acerca da integralidade nas reformas sanitária e agrária. Texto contexto - enferm. 2012;21(3):667-74. doi: 10.1590/S0104-07072012000300023.
3. Mattos RA. A integralidade na prática (ou sobre a prática da integralidade). Cad Saúde Pública. 2004;20(5):1411-6. doi: 10.1590/S0102-311X2004000500037.
4. Cambier J, Masson M, Dehen H. Neurologia. 11. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Guanabara Koogan; 2005.
5. Coudry MIH. A linguagem em funcionamento na afasia. Letras de Hoje. 2001;36(3):449-55.
6. Morato EM, Tubero AL, Santana AP, Damasceno B, De Souza FF, Macedo HO et al. Sobre as afasias e os afásicos: Subsídios teóricos e práticos elaborados pelo Centro de Convivência de Afásicos (Universidade Estadual de Campinas). São Paulo: Unicamp; 2002.
7. American Occupational Therapy Association. Occupational therapy practice framework: domain and process (2nd). Am J Occup Ther. 2008;62(6):625-83.
8. Paiva JS. Avaliação dos papéis ocupacionais e qualidade de vida do paciente pé diabético [Monografia de Conclusão de Curso]. Brasília (DF): Universidade de Brasília - UNB, Curso de Terapia Ocupacional; 2015.
9. American Occupational Therapy Association. Estrutura da prática da Terapia Ocupacional: domínio & processo-traduzida. Rev Ter Ocup Univ São Paulo. 2015;26(esp):1-49. doi:10.11606/issn.2238-6149.v26iespp1-49.
10. Melnyk BM, Fineout-Overholt E. Making the case for evidence-based practice. In: _______ (orgs). Evidence based practice in nursing & healthcare. A guide to best practice. Philadelphia: Lippincot Williams & Wilkin; 2005. p.3-24.
11. Kirkevold M, Bragstad LK, Bronken BA, Kvigne K, Martinsen R, Hjelle EG et al. Promoting psychosocial well-being following stroke: study protocol for a randomized, controlled trial. BMC Psychology. 2018;6(1):12. doi:10.1186/s40359-018-0223-6.
12. Hreha K, Mulry C, Gross M, Jedziniak T, Gramas N, Ohevshalom L et al. Assessing chronic stroke survivors with aphasia sheds light on prevalence of spatial neglect. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation. 2017;24(2):91-8. doi:10.1080/10749357.2016.1196906
13. Branco JP, Oliveira S, Pinheiro JP, Ferreira PL. Assessing upper limb function: transcultural adaptation and validation of the Portuguese version of the Stroke Upper Limb Capacity Scale. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2017;9:15. Published 2017 Aug 3. doi:10.1186/s13102-017-0078-9.
14. Ng L, Sansom J, Zhang N, Amatya B, Khan F. Effectiveness of a structured sexual rehabilitation programme following stroke: a randomized controlled trial. J Rehabil Med. 2017;49(4):333-40. doi:10.2340/16501977-2219.
15. Friedman RB, Sullivan KL, Snider SF, Luta G, Jones KT. Leveraging the test effect to improve maintenance of the gains achieved through cognitive rehabilitation. Neuropsychology. 2017;31(2):220-8. doi:10.1037/neu0000318.
16. Skidmore ER, Butters M, Whyte E, Grattan E, Shen J, Terhorst L. Guided training relative to direct skill training for individuals with cognitive impairments after stroke: a pilot randomized trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2017;98(4):673-80. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2016.10.004.
17. Purdy SC, Wanigasekara I, Cañete OM, Moore C, McCann CM. Aphasia and auditory processing after stroke through an International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Lens. Seminars in Hearing. 2016;37(3):233-46. doi:10.1055/s-0036-1584408.
18. Pommerehn J, Delboni MCC, Fedosse E. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health, and aphasia: a study of social participation. CoDAS. 2016;28(2):132-40. doi:10.1590/2317-1782/201620150102.
19. Koenig-Bruhin M, Vanbellingen T, Schumacher R, Pflugshaupt T, Annoni JM, Müri RM et al. Screening for language disorders in stroke: german validation of the Language Screening Test (LAST). Cerebrovasc Dis Extra. 2016;6(1):27-31. doi:10.1159/00044577819.
20. Meyer AM, Getz HR, Brennan DM, Hu TM, Friedman RB. Telerehabilitation of anomia in primary progressive aphasia. Aphasiology. 2016;30(4):483- 507. doi:10.1080/02687038.2015.1081142.
21. Sackley CM, Walker MF, Burton CR, Watkins CL, Mant J, Roalfe AK et al. An Occupational Therapy intervention for residents with strokerelated disabilities in UK Care Homes (OTCH): cluster randomised controlled trial with economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess. 2016;20(15):1- 138. doi: 10.3310/hta20150.
22. Off CA, Griffin JR, Spencer KA, Rogers M. The impact of dose on naming accuracy with persons with aphasia. Aphasiology. 2016;30(9):983-1011. doi:10.1080/02687038.2015.1100705.22.
23. Lee H, Lee Y, Choi H, Pyun S-B. Community integration and quality of life in aphasia after stroke. Yonsei Med J. 2015;56(6):1694-702. doi:10.3349/ymj.2015.56.6.1694.
24. Scrutinio D, Monitillo V, Guida P, Nardulli R, Multari V, Monitillo F et al. Functional gain after inpatient stroke rehabilitation. Stroke. 2015;46(10):2976-80. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.010440.
25. Tao J, Fang Y, Wu Z, Rao T, Su Y, Lin L et al. Community-applied research of a traditional Chinese medicine rehabilitation scheme on Broca’s aphasia after stroke: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2014;15:290. Published 2014 Jul 21. doi:10.1186/1745-6215-15-290.
26. Skidmore ER, Dawson DR, Whyte EM, Butters MA, Dew MA, Grattan ES et al. Developing complex interventions: lessons learned from a pilot study examining strategy training in acute stroke rehabilitation. Clin Rehabil. 2014;28(4):378-87. doi: 10.1177/0269215513502799.
27. Guidetti S, Ytterberg C, Ekstam L, Johansson U, Eriksson G. Changes in the impact of stroke between 3 and 12 months post-stroke, assessed with the Stroke Impact Scale. J Rehabil Med. 2014;46(10):963-8. doi: 10.2340/16501977-1865.
28. Silva SM, Correa FI, Faria CDCM, Correa JCF. Comparison of quality-of-life instruments for assessing the participation after stroke based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Braz. J. Phys. Ther. 2013;17(5):470-8. doi: 10.1590/ S1413-35552012005000118.
29. Mazaux JM, Lagadec T, Panchoa MS, Zongo D, Asselineau J, Douce J et al. Communication activity in stroke patients with aphasia. J Rehabil Med. 2013;45(4):341-6. doi: 10.2340/16501977-1122.
30. Baumgaertner A, Grewe T, Ziegler W, Floel A, Springer L, Martus P et al. FCET2EC (From controlled experimental trial to = 2 everyday communication): how effective is intensive integrative therapy for stroke-induced chronic aphasia under routine clinical conditions? A study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2013;14:308. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-14-308.
31. Gialanella B, Santoro R, Ferlucci C. Predicting outcome after stroke: the role of basic activities of daily living. Eur J of Phys and Rehabil Med. 2013;49(5):629-37.
32. Henry ML, Meese MV, Truong S, Babiak MC, Miller BL, Gorno-Tempini ML. Treatment for apraxia of speech in nonfluent variant primary progressive aphasia. Behav Neurol. 2013;26(1-2):77-88. doi:10.3233/BEN-2012-120260.
33. Beeson PM, Higginson K, Rising K. Writing treatment for aphasia: a texting approach. JSLHR. 2013;56(3):945-55. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2012/11-0360).
34. Weaver LL, Page SJ, Sheffler L, Chae J. Minimal depression: how does it relate to upperextremity impairment and function in stroke? Am J Occup Ther. 2013;67(5):550-5. doi:10.5014/ ajot.2013.008391.
35. Bowen A, Hesketh A, Patchick E, Young A, Davies L. Clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and training for individuals with cognitive impairments after stroke: a pilot randomized trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2017;98(4):673-80. doi:10.1016/j. apmr.2016.10.004.
36. Kiran S. Typicality of inanimate category exemplars in aphasia treatment: further evidence for semantic complexity. JSLHR. 2008;51(6):1550-68. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2008/07-0038).
37. Bahia MM, Chun RYS. Quality of life in aphasia: differences between fluent and non-fluent aphasic augmentative and alternative communication users. Audiol. Commun. Res. 2014;19(4):352-9. doi: 10.1590/S2317-64312014000300001353.
38. Canuto MA, Nogueira LT. Acidente vascular cerebral e qualidade de vida: uma revisão integrativa. J. res. fundam. care. 2015;7(2):2561-8. doi: 10.9789/2175-5361.2015.v7i2.2561-2568.
39. Cernescu RP, Leite CAG, Lessa WM. Reabilitação fonoaudiológica em grupo de pacientes afásicos. UNOPAR Cient., Ciênc. Biol. Saúde. 2000;2(1):77-91. doi: 10.17921/2447-8938.2000v2n1p%25p.
40. Silveira L, Ribeiro V. Grupo de adesão ao tratamento: espaço de “ensinagem” para profissionais de saúde e pacientes. Interface - Comunic., Saúde, Educ. 2005;9(16):91-104. doi: 10.1590/S1414-32832005000100008.
Submitted date:
01/15/2019
Accepted date:
07/26/2019
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Mendeley
Email