Validity and features of spontaneous speech in acute aphasia as evaluated with the Brief Aphasia Evaluation: is fluent aphasia more severe than nonfluent aphasia?

ABSTRACT Purpose To explore the relationship between the two components of spontaneous speech in the Brief Aphasia Evaluation (BAE) and the rest of the scale represented by its three main factors: The Expression, Comprehension, and Complementary factors. Methods BAE has proven validity and relia...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Nora Silvana Vigliecca
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Sociedade Brasileira de Fonoaudiologia 2019-03-01
Series:CoDAS
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2317-17822019000100312&lng=en&tlng=en
id doaj-de2f855a4b9d4e49ad6902d94fb4607d
record_format Article
spelling doaj-de2f855a4b9d4e49ad6902d94fb4607d2020-11-24T23:59:37ZengSociedade Brasileira de FonoaudiologiaCoDAS2317-17822019-03-0131110.1590/2317-1782/20192018048S2317-17822019000100312Validity and features of spontaneous speech in acute aphasia as evaluated with the Brief Aphasia Evaluation: is fluent aphasia more severe than nonfluent aphasia?Nora Silvana ViglieccaABSTRACT Purpose To explore the relationship between the two components of spontaneous speech in the Brief Aphasia Evaluation (BAE) and the rest of the scale represented by its three main factors: The Expression, Comprehension, and Complementary factors. Methods BAE has proven validity and reliability. The evaluation of spontaneous speech in this scale comprises two components: Performance Rank (score: 0-3) and Type of Disorder (Fluency [F], Content [C], or Mixed [FC]) when rank < 3. Sixty-seven patients with left brain damage and 30 demographically matched healthy participants (HP) were studied. It was analyzed the correlation between Performance Rank and the three BAE factors and, recoding 3 as 0 and < 3 as 1, the sensitivity/specificity of this component for each factor. The effect of Type of Disorder on the three factors was analyzed. Results 1) Performance Rank: Correlations of 0.84 (Expression), 0.81 (Comprehension), and 0.76 (Complementary) were observed, with a sensitivity and specificity ≥ 78% for any factor; 2) Type of Disorder: The performance significantly decreased from FC to C and from C to F in Expression (FC < C < F), from FC to C and from FC to F also in Comprehension and Complementary, from patients with any type of disorder to HP. Conclusion Performance Rank was a relevant indicator of aphasia by its consistency with valid and comprehensive dimensions of acute language impairments. A degree difference between F and C was observed, being F a milder disorder; i.e., fluency problems were less severe than retrieval or anomia ones.http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2317-17822019000100312&lng=en&tlng=enAphasiaAnomiaCognitionDiagnostic Techniques and ProceduresEarly DiagnosisPsychology, AppliedSpeech Language PathologyNeuropsychiatryNeuropsychological TestsValidity of Tests
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Nora Silvana Vigliecca
spellingShingle Nora Silvana Vigliecca
Validity and features of spontaneous speech in acute aphasia as evaluated with the Brief Aphasia Evaluation: is fluent aphasia more severe than nonfluent aphasia?
CoDAS
Aphasia
Anomia
Cognition
Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures
Early Diagnosis
Psychology, Applied
Speech Language Pathology
Neuropsychiatry
Neuropsychological Tests
Validity of Tests
author_facet Nora Silvana Vigliecca
author_sort Nora Silvana Vigliecca
title Validity and features of spontaneous speech in acute aphasia as evaluated with the Brief Aphasia Evaluation: is fluent aphasia more severe than nonfluent aphasia?
title_short Validity and features of spontaneous speech in acute aphasia as evaluated with the Brief Aphasia Evaluation: is fluent aphasia more severe than nonfluent aphasia?
title_full Validity and features of spontaneous speech in acute aphasia as evaluated with the Brief Aphasia Evaluation: is fluent aphasia more severe than nonfluent aphasia?
title_fullStr Validity and features of spontaneous speech in acute aphasia as evaluated with the Brief Aphasia Evaluation: is fluent aphasia more severe than nonfluent aphasia?
title_full_unstemmed Validity and features of spontaneous speech in acute aphasia as evaluated with the Brief Aphasia Evaluation: is fluent aphasia more severe than nonfluent aphasia?
title_sort validity and features of spontaneous speech in acute aphasia as evaluated with the brief aphasia evaluation: is fluent aphasia more severe than nonfluent aphasia?
publisher Sociedade Brasileira de Fonoaudiologia
series CoDAS
issn 2317-1782
publishDate 2019-03-01
description ABSTRACT Purpose To explore the relationship between the two components of spontaneous speech in the Brief Aphasia Evaluation (BAE) and the rest of the scale represented by its three main factors: The Expression, Comprehension, and Complementary factors. Methods BAE has proven validity and reliability. The evaluation of spontaneous speech in this scale comprises two components: Performance Rank (score: 0-3) and Type of Disorder (Fluency [F], Content [C], or Mixed [FC]) when rank < 3. Sixty-seven patients with left brain damage and 30 demographically matched healthy participants (HP) were studied. It was analyzed the correlation between Performance Rank and the three BAE factors and, recoding 3 as 0 and < 3 as 1, the sensitivity/specificity of this component for each factor. The effect of Type of Disorder on the three factors was analyzed. Results 1) Performance Rank: Correlations of 0.84 (Expression), 0.81 (Comprehension), and 0.76 (Complementary) were observed, with a sensitivity and specificity ≥ 78% for any factor; 2) Type of Disorder: The performance significantly decreased from FC to C and from C to F in Expression (FC < C < F), from FC to C and from FC to F also in Comprehension and Complementary, from patients with any type of disorder to HP. Conclusion Performance Rank was a relevant indicator of aphasia by its consistency with valid and comprehensive dimensions of acute language impairments. A degree difference between F and C was observed, being F a milder disorder; i.e., fluency problems were less severe than retrieval or anomia ones.
topic Aphasia
Anomia
Cognition
Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures
Early Diagnosis
Psychology, Applied
Speech Language Pathology
Neuropsychiatry
Neuropsychological Tests
Validity of Tests
url http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2317-17822019000100312&lng=en&tlng=en
work_keys_str_mv AT norasilvanavigliecca validityandfeaturesofspontaneousspeechinacuteaphasiaasevaluatedwiththebriefaphasiaevaluationisfluentaphasiamoreseverethannonfluentaphasia
_version_ 1725447164126035968