Dec 13, 2022
Welcome to this Aphasia Access Aphasia Conversations Podcast. My name is Janet Patterson. I am a Research Speech-Language Pathologist at the VA Northern California Healthcare System in Martinez, California, and a member of the Aphasia Access Podcast Working Group. Aphasia Access strives to provide members with information, inspiration, and ideas that support their efforts in engaging with persons with aphasia and their families through a variety of educational materials and resources. I am today's host for today’s episode that will feature Dr. Nina Simmons-Mackie and Dr. Jamie Azios. These Show Notes accompany the conversation with Dr. Simmons-Mackie and Dr. Azios but are not a verbatim transcript.
In today’s episode you will learn about:
- Lache Pas La Patate! and aphasia
- The importance of being mindful of gap areas in aphasia service and research
- Moving aphasia care best practices from knowledge to action
Dr. Janet Patterson: Welcome to our listeners. Today I am delighted to be speaking with two individuals who are well known in the field of aphasia rehabilitation, Dr. Nina Simmons-Mackie and Dr. Jamie Azios. Nina and Jamie authored the text, Aphasia in North America, which is also known as the State of Aphasia Report. The original State of Aphasia Report was published by Aphasia Access in 2018, and contains information describing, among other topics, the frequency and demographics of aphasia and its impact on individuals and society, and aphasia services and service gaps. The State of Aphasia Report is a valuable resource for clinicians, researchers, administrators, and third-party funding agencies as we seek to craft a rehabilitation atmosphere that balances the treatment evidence base, the resource support for community aphasia groups, and the principles of client centered care. An updated State of Aphasia Report is forthcoming.
Each of our Podcasts in 2021 and 2022 highlighted at least one of the gap areas in aphasia care mentioned in the original State of Aphasia Report. For more information on the original State of Aphasia report, check out Podcast Episode #62 with Dr. Liz Hoover, as she describes these ten gap areas and their impact on aphasia rehabilitation. Our conversation today takes a broader view of the aphasia service gaps, crossing all ten gap areas. My questions for Nina and Jamie will ask them to reflect on the impetus for the original State of Aphasia Report, as well as the changes that appear in the updated State of Aphasia Report.
My first guest is Dr. Nina Simmons-Mackie, Professor Emeritus at Southeastern Louisiana University in Hammond, Louisiana. She has received the honors of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, the Louisiana Speech-Language-Hearing Association, and the Academy of Neurologic Communication Disorders and Sciences. She has published numerous articles and chapters and has had many years of clinical, academic and research experience in the area of adult aphasia. Also joining me today is Dr. Jamie H. Azios. She is the Doris B. Hawthorne Endowed Chair in the Department of Communicative Disorders at the University of Louisiana in Lafayette. Her research interests include qualitative research methodologies, understanding perspectives of people living with communication disabilities, co-constructed conversation and aphasia, and the impact of communicative environments on social participation and inclusion. She has published articles related to client centeredness, communication access, and life participation approaches to aphasia. Welcome Nina and Jamie to Aphasia Access Conversations and our discussion about the State of Aphasia Reports.
Dr. Nina Simmons-Mackie: Thanks Janet, happy to be here.
Dr. Jamie Azios: Really excited and honored to be here. Thanks for having us.
Janet: Good, and I look forward to a great discussion and learning about the State of Aphasia Reports. Nina and Jamie, I would like to begin our chat today by asking about the original State of Aphasia Report. Many of our listeners are familiar with the book, which is a resource published by aphasia access, describing the social, financial and life quality consequences of aphasia. It contains current statistics, compelling stories, and a one-stop report to understand the state of aphasia care in North America. Nina, you were the impetus for this project and oversaw its production. How did you organize a team to think about the need for this project and envision the value it could provide to people with aphasia, clinicians, medical and rehabilitation professionals interested in aphasia, administrators, and organizations who fund aphasia research?
Nina: Well Janet, when I started out in the field of aphasia, it wasn't all that difficult to review the literature on an aspect of aphasia. Now, the amount of information is just overwhelming. A kernel of an idea started forming as I was involved in a variety of projects that required a huge amount of effort gathering statistics and references to justify different types of services for aphasia. As I talked to lots of colleagues floating the idea for a comprehensive report, everybody agreed that it would be immensely helpful to pull data from diverse sources into one document. Something that could be a quick reference for grants or advocacy or program proposals.
I also had some personal experiences at the time that highlighted some gaps in the system of care for aphasia. So, it really struck me as a worthwhile undertaking and the board of Aphasia Access was really supportive of the idea. We succeeded in pulling together a diverse team of experts to serve on an advisory committee to review the chapters and vet the information. The report was originally envisioned as a relatively brief statement of gaps, but as I got into the literature, I realized that it was too much for just a short paper. In fact, it turned into 163 pages in the original document published in 2018. Now, it's been about five years since this publication, and so much has happened in the aphasia world. So, we felt like it was time for an update. Next year, we hope the state of aphasia will be published. Jamie graciously agreed to join me in this project, researching and writing the updated report. Jamie, you might have some comments on the update.
Jamie: Yeah, it's been so fun to work on this project with Nina. I've learned a lot from reviewing all the work in our field, and other fields too. Just getting my feet wet with the kind of experiences that Nina was talking about, pulling together this key information from so many places. It's been really challenging, but it's also been really rewarding.
I didn't realize just how much has changed in the last five years. There're just some amazing things happening in terms of aphasia programming, and technology, and attempts at overcoming gaps and equity and inclusion. That's not even talking about the way stroke and aphasia care has been impacted by our worldwide pandemic. So, in terms of what's new for the update, you can expect us to hit on all those new key areas. We're really going to try to highlight both the gaps and solutions over the last five years.
Janet: You both describe such an exciting project. Time flies, and things happen. And if you get busy in your own little world, sometimes you don't recognize all the things that are going on around you and all the changes. This is a great idea that you had 100 years ago Nina or maybe five or six. I'm glad Jamie, you're part of the current project. One component of the original State of Aphasia in North America is a list of ten gap areas, and you mentioned those a moment ago Jamie, gap areas in aphasia care and aphasia research. In planning our podcasts, we identified at least one of these gap areas to highlight in each interview. The ten gap areas are listed in the show notes for this conversation and discussed in Aphasia Access Podcast Episode #62 with Dr. Liz Hoover. So, Nina and Jamie as well, how did your team identify the gap areas for the original State of Aphasia Report and consider the potential for their influence on aphasia care and research?
Nina: Well, really the gap areas grew directly out of the data. It was similar to a literature review. The main difference is that a typical literature review addresses a specific topic, whereas this report addressed any topic that might be useful to advocate for aphasia services. So, the sources included government statistics, some original surveys of clinicians in North America, and grey literature. Both Jamie and I have a background in qualitative research so our approach has been pretty much like qualitative research. We take a broad-based look at the literature and identify themes that seem like topics that would be important in advocating for aphasia services. And then as we dig in and begin collecting the information, the gap areas become fairly obvious. In other words, we don't just think up gap areas. They represent what is described in the aphasia literature.
Jamie: We mentioned this earlier, but one of the big gap areas that's going to be recognized in the update, likely because of the impact of COVID and our shifts to engaging more digitally, is the idea the inaccessibility that people with aphasia have when it comes to using technology. We know that there has always been a digital divide, but it seems like COVID, and the loss of face-to-face contact has really widened that gap. Also widening that gap is just the fact that older people in general are using technology more and people with aphasia seem to be falling behind when compared to their age-matched peers due to these accessibility issues. The data show that people with aphasia don't text as much as other people their age, they seem to have more difficulty retaining technology skills, they have difficulty using social media platforms. We know that these things are critical for maintaining social connection. So even before COVID, we saw an increasing use of technology to access information, interaction, across a range of activities. But during COVID, and even after COVID, there's an absolute explosion. We do plan to dedicate a chapter to technology and accessibility.
Janet: That's good, which leads me right into my next question for the two of you. I wonder if you would reflect on the original State of Aphasia Report and its contents and describe the changes in the information in the updated State of Aphasia Report? In particular, would you comment on the ten gap areas in the original report, and any changes in the updated report? I know you've alluded to a few of them in the last few minutes, but I'd like you if you will, take a few more minutes to be a little more specific about the nature of the gap areas, and how they're changing as we look forward to the updated State of Aphasia Report.
Nina: I think the original report definitely raised an awareness of the gaps and aphasia services. Those gap areas remain relevant, so it's not like we're going to drop out gap areas. But the good news is that there's been a surge in the research and the literature relative to some of those gaps. It's typical that there is a significant lag from research and publications to implementing research into actual daily practice. This is what's interesting relative to the update, looking at how those gaps have affected actual daily practice. I think there have been two Podcasts on implementation that aphasia access has presented. One was Rob Cavanaugh talking about issues in implementation back in October, and Natalie Douglas talked about implementation science in 2021. That's significant relative to the gaps and aphasia services that we've recognized. I'll give you an example. A very recent Podcast by Sameer Ashaie addressed mental health and people living with aphasia. Mental health services was a big gap identified in the original 2018 report. Now, as we've updated the report, we find that attention to mental health and daily aphasia practice continues to be a significant gap. Not many SLPs are screening for depression and mental health professionals remain relatively uninformed about how to conduct counseling with people with aphasia. But it's been said that approximately seven or eight years is often the time it takes to move from research to implementing research in daily practice. The good news is that the literature in the area of mental health, for example, has surged since the 2018 report. We found 47 new papers on mental health and aphasia published in just the past five years. That's a typical journey that we see from a gap in service to implementation of the services and awareness of the problem and recognition of the need to change have to happen first. I think we've met that requirement of building awareness of a lot of these gap areas.
Now, we have to focus on how to move from knowledge to action, meaning that SLPs and other health care professionals have to figure out how to address things like mental health in daily practice. I see the report as helping us see where we are on that road to best practices, and possibly pushing faster than the seven-to-eight-year gap in research to practice. Also, one of the gap areas was in SLPs addressing participation in daily practice. A very similar thing seems to have happened in that there's an increase in research in participation-oriented activities and therapy. But the actual practice, according to a survey that we've done recently shows that SLPs are about the same as they were in 2018, relative to actually integrating participation-oriented tasks into daily practices. I think it gives us an outline of where we have to move with this current report.
Jamie: Yes, and that makes me think of some of the work that I'm working on now for the updated version in communication access, which was also a gap area in the original version of the State of Aphasia Report. Something that's really struck me is that over the last five years, so far there's been 25 new communication partner training studies in healthcare settings. That includes training healthcare providers or healthcare students that are going to be working, mostly the studies are in hospitals. That's amazing, in the past five years that's a lot of work that's been done in that area.
But the other thing about that work is that has helped us learn more about the complexity of delivering an intervention like that within a health care system. A lot of the studies that have come out have also showed, by interviewing nurses and other health care staff that have been trained, that even after training healthcare providers still seem to have a really narrow understanding of what communication supports are, or there might be a burden for implementing those into their daily routine care tasks and other things that they're doing. In general, nurses have expressed more critical than positive views about the relevance and the usefulness of communication partner training. It seems like healthcare professionals know the strategies are good. They know they need to use the strategies, but then they kind of get stuck in a place of uncertainty about how to switch up when it doesn't quite go the way that they expect it to go in an interaction. I remember one of the quotes from a paper that talked about this was a nurse saying something like, “I went to use a strategy. I know it didn't work. The patient became increasingly frustrated, and I needed to use a different strategy, but I just didn't know what to do.” So, in thinking about moving forward, it's great that we see this work coming out, but it's a continued focus on shaping these programs and understanding the systems that maybe we need to approach it a little bit differently or make some adjustments so that we're really carrying through with the goal of the intervention and the outcomes are as we expect them to be and are positive.
Janet: This is exactly research into practice. Isn't what you just described, Jamie, much like all the human nature that we do? When we first learn something we're not so sure about it, and we don't quite know what to do when things don't go as we anticipate. The more familiar we become, the better we are at switching up as you say or changing or keeping our goal in mind, which is exactly what I'm hoping that we can talk about and the information in this updated State of Aphasia Report will help clinicians and researchers.
Nina, you mentioned two things that are something that I think about a lot and first of all, was your comment about the Podcast with Rob Cavanaugh. That was my Podcast with him, and we had a wonderful conversation. I love his ideas paying attention to, how do we actually deliver the service and are we doing what we think we are doing? And given the specific confines that we are working within, are we able to achieve the effect that we want, or do we have to make some changes? To me that seems like an important line of thinking and of research coming up about how we can make a difference given what we have or given whatever constraints we have.
The other comment that you made is about depression and mental illness. I think back to my Podcast with Rebecca Hunting-Pompon and some work that she's been doing, really looking at depression and the prevalence of it among people with aphasia, and it's greater than we think. So, your comment about identifying it as a gap area and what we're going to do. How are we going to take research into practice so that we can actually address those points that you're making. Which goes into my next question to ask you, as we look forward to the future of aphasia care, and specifically, as we move from research into practice, how might you see the information in the updated State of Aphasia Report and the gap areas that you'll identify within that publication? How do you see that continuing to guide aphasia care and research?
Nina: I think like the first report, the updated report will continue to raise awareness of major areas of need for people living with aphasia. I think it'll continue to serve as an advocacy tool. I know people have told me that they've pulled out parts of the original report to present to administration, and people have borrowed statistics to put into grants and things like that. So, I think those kinds of activities would continue. The report highlights areas where research is desperately needed. For example, there's a whole section on social isolation in aphasia, and we have data that's grown in the past five years verifying that this is a problem. This updated report shows that we haven't really seen very much in the way of intervention research or models for relevant interventions to address social isolation. I think as people read the report, they'll recognize areas where research is needed, and exactly where models need to look at practical ways to implement these different interventions. The report can highlight those kinds of questions so that researchers and clinicians can begin to address those questions in the next five years. It's just kind of a little push to keep the system moving along to be more efficient and more focused on addressing the needs of people living with aphasia.
Jamie: You know, another thing is, I think it's going to be good as Nina said, directing researchers and clinicians into maybe some practices that we need to make sure that we incorporate whenever we're thinking about what research is valuable, and what research is worth doing and the impact of that research on the people with aphasia. Something that's coming up as maybe a new gap area or continued gap area is the idea of stakeholder engaged research and including people with aphasia in that process. That was another Podcast that we just recently, I think, had in the last month or so. Something that Dr. Jackie Hinckley said that really struck me was that research that's produced in collaboration with stakeholders is efficient, even though it's more time consuming. That's because it has a better chance of making it into actual clinical practice. It can also be incorporated much quicker than research that's solely dictated by the interest of the researcher who likely doesn't have a full understanding of the barriers or the institutional problems that exist in a space. So, that's another idea of just thinking forward in ways that we hope that these gap areas are going to be addressed.
Janet: Both of you just in answering this last question and in things that you've said earlier, have touched upon the concept of how do you go from research to practice and most specifically, in the area of clinician work? It's lovely to say things, but how do you actually do it? How do you implement it? How do you get comfortable with a particular action and being able to change course, if that action is not working? I know it's important for aphasia clinicians and researchers to be mindful of the gap areas in aphasia care and to address them in their work, but that is a charge to us that is sometimes easier said than done. During our Aphasia Access Conversations, we've asked guests for their thoughts on how clinicians and researchers can implement actions in their daily activities to address a gap area. Importantly, we've asked our guests to consider actions that are easy to implement yet may have a broad impact on persons with aphasia or the family or the clinical environment.
I wonder if you would each share with our listeners some of your ideas and thoughts on how aphasia clinicians and researchers can remain mindful of the gap areas in the midst of their busy schedules, and feel comfortable incorporating specific actions? I see, and I know you see it as well, you get busy in a clinical life and all the daily activities, and you start to forget, “Oh yes, I should be mindful of the gap, but I forgot because I had a report to write.” So, I wonder if you could give us some very practical ideas, thinking from the perspective of a clinician and how they can bear in mind the gaps and how their actions might relate to them?
Nina: Well, one of the different things in the updated report from the original report is it will include solutions that are drawn from the research literature. But of course, the problem that you alluded to is much of our research is not always feasible in the whirlwind of everyday practices. I think the message for researchers that Jamie alluded to, is to make the interventions that are being trialed more practical by getting the input of stakeholders, of clinicians, of people with aphasia, to see if they're generalizable to everyday practice.
I think the biggest need is for all of us to remain aware of gap areas, so we're not just thinking about language, but thinking about mood, and family needs and daily lives. Awareness of gaps is the first step towards improving those services. One of the things we used to talk about a lot was long-term and short-term goals. The terminology now is sort of moving towards talking about aims and targets of therapy. Using that terminology, we need to be sure that the aims of therapy, that is the ultimate goals, are stated in terms of participation in chosen life roles or activities, not in terms of WAB scores, or how many words a person can name. In other words, the ultimate targets that are worked on in therapy need to lead to meaningful outcomes. To me, one of the most practical things is for us all to envision goal setting in a way that places us in the position of looking at what gets in the way of those big picture aims. It's not always just things like language problems. It may be other things like confidence, depression, poor support for partners, lack of opportunities to communicate with other people. So, thinking more broadly about those ultimate aims or goals for each person with aphasia helps us see what the most efficient targets are for therapy. If a big barrier is depression, then that needs to be addressed or improved, because word finding won't make any difference if the person is too depressed to engage with other people. I guess what I am saying is, being aware of gaps in services and of the domains that impact life with aphasia helps the clinician to orient to what is needed most for that person, rather than what we habitually just go in and do every day.
Another suggestion is to get help. Going back to the example of the mental health needs. Maybe investing initial energy in training some mental health professionals on your rehab team or in your community how to communicate with people with aphasia, and how to do that kind of specialized counseling that's needed for this population. Then, when somebody pops up and you feel that they're depressed, you have a resource there that you can refer the person with aphasia to, so that it doesn't fall on your own shoulders to manage the depression yourself. The same thing goes with using the rehab team to increase participation. So that whole idea of dividing and conquering. As I said, the updated report shows that SLPs don't focus that much on participation-oriented activities. But if the rehab team all identified a participation goal in unison, that interprofessional kind of approach, and then all worked together towards fulfillment of that aim or participation goal, then it takes a little of the burden off the SLP in their daily frenzy of activity.
Janet: You know, Nina, you gave an excellent example. Another good example and an illustration of that was in a conversation with Mary Purdy a little while earlier this year, where she talked about interprofessional education. One of the goals, which is exactly what you said, was how do you get the rehab team thinking about it? The example that she gave was from her own personal experience about everybody was working towards helping an individual. The problem, what got in the way, the individual wanted to knit and couldn't knit. So how do they all work together, from language, from the occupational therapist, and physical therapist, to remove the obstacles and then allow the rehabilitation to consider. So, that's exactly right. And, Jamie, I know you've got some ideas as well.
Jamie: Well, that was just inspiring. It makes me want to go be a clinician every day again in long term care, because it's just really inspiring to think about change in that way of clinical practice. What came to me when you said easy to implement, but have a broad impact, it brought me back to a paper that I was reading. It's by Mia Loft and colleagues, and it's called, Call for Human Contact and Support. It's a paper about stroke survivors and their experiences in inpatient rehabilitation. Essentially, what they communicated was that they just wanted to be treated like humans. They wanted to be asked how they were doing. They wanted to be talked to like they were a person and not a patient. The really interesting thing was that they felt like these negative experiences really derailed their rehabilitation and motivation to get better, because they were so worried about what was going to happen after they left this place, “What happens when I go home? Am I going to go back to work?” These really negative emotional feelings disrupted the very start of their rehabilitation journey. Instead, what they ended up doing was kind of sitting in isolation most of the time and feeling like their interactions with healthcare workers were negative. That made me think back to the tiny habits talk that Linda Worrall gave at IARC. We as SLPs, we’re the models for what good communication looks like in those settings. I think it's kind of our responsibility to start building those habits into our own practices. It might change a little bit of a shift in our view about what therapy looks like, and what's our role in that situation. It might take us recognizing the importance of stopping and asking somebody, how are you doing, but really listening. Maybe starting small with some of those tiny habits and being a model can really influence our other colleagues that we're working with of the importance of these small things in the rehab journey for the patient, especially early on when they're dealing with these emotional consequences of diagnosis.
Janet: You mentioned the word motivation, which of course was another previous Podcast with Mike Biel talking about the role of motivation. Everybody says, “oh yes, yes, motivation is important to consider.” But nobody really does much about it. I mean, how do you know if somebody's motivated or not? To your point about sitting in isolation in the care facility, you can't just say that patient is not motivated, therefore, we're not going to do a particular activity. Until you have a discussion, you don't know. You don't know what they want to achieve, which is back to your comment earlier Nina, about what does this patient want to achieve in the long run? What is the aim here? And if you can have those conversations, find out the motivation, I think you have a greater likelihood of a maximum outcome, positive outcome of the rehabilitation journey.
I thought of something and wonder about this idea. Wouldn't it be fun...well, maybe it wouldn't be fun, I don't know, developing a little sort of cheat sheet or a little card that the Aphasia Access might put out that has these gap areas. If it's cute, designed well, it may be something that clinicians could put on their badge or keep on their clipboards. Instead of having to remember it in their brain, it's all right there in front of them - “Remember about these gap areas is you provide a service to an individual with aphasia.”
Nina: That's a great idea. Little infographic that's something people can carry around and remind themselves. Good idea.
Jamie: Yeah, I love it.
Janet: Well, thank you. Let's see if it comes to pass because it truly is, I think very difficult to bear everything in mind when you're in a busy schedule. Anything that we can do to help a clinician have an easier life, like you don't have to remember the gap areas, they’re right here in front of you, we’ll see. It's an idea.
As we draw this interview to a close, Nina and Jamie, I wonder if you would each reflect on your work and experience in aphasia rehabilitation, and in preparing the State of Aphasia Reports. Are there a few pearls of wisdom, or lessons learned or words of guidance you might offer our listeners, as they interact with persons with aphasia, and approach aphasia care on a daily basis?
Nina: Well, I'm not sure I have any pearls, maybe some grains of sand to irritate the thought process. I think the first point I would make is understanding, or deeply understanding the values of a life participation approach to aphasia, is critical to achieving relevant and meaningful outcomes. I think the most important clinical skill, and I alluded to this earlier, is knowing how to set meaningful participation goals in collaboration with clients. Once we learn this, then the rest sort of falls into place because you're thinking about the big picture and what is important where. I think that's a key thing is learning how to write those big picture goals, and then see how to get there.
I think everyone involved with aphasia should read Linda Worrall’s Seven habits of highly successful aphasia therapists. I think her PowerPoint on that topic that she presented is available on the Aphasia Access website. It's a common sense and elegant outline of the Must Do’s for any aphasia therapist. It's seven things that make a good aphasia therapist, and if each item on her list were addressed, we could probably scratch off a bunch of gaps in services. I think that's another one of the things that I would recommend.
Jamie: Yeah, that is a great paper. It's been so influential for me and working with people with aphasia, but training clinicians, it's a great paper. I don't have any pearls of wisdom, either. I guess my only advice and Nina you've probably heard this saying before. This is something that is said down here in Cajun country in our French culture. It's “lache pas la patate”. It means, “don't drop the potato”. Essentially what that means is, even when things get really hard, don't give up. So if you're a clinician working in a situation where it's really hard for you to feel like you can achieve some of the things that we're talking about today, don't give up and know that we're all working towards this goal. We are recognizing these issues. I promise you, we're all thinking about these things, and that we're in it together.
Janet: I love that phrase, Jamie. I'm going to learn to have it trickle off my tongue and I'm going to use it frequently. That's a great idea. Doesn't it really describe how we want to be acting as humans. We're all in this together. Be a human. This person with aphasia is another human and we're trying to help this human with aphasia, given the skills that we possess that they perhaps don't. But they possess skills that we perhaps don't so together, we're on the rehab journey. Say it again, the phrase. “lash……”
Jamie: Lache pas la patate
Janet: Lache pas la patate. We're going to remember that phrase.
Thank you, Nina and Jamie for being part of the Aphasia Access Conversations, and for your efforts in creating the State of Aphasia Reports. I look forward to reading the updated version and seeing how its information will influence aphasia rehabilitation, and how it can assist clinicians and researchers as we continually work to improve care for and partnership with persons with aphasia and their families. I especially, am thankful that we had such a fun conversation, and I learned a new term today. The conversation we had continues to make me mindful of how we interact with everyone in our world, especially those people who have aphasia and their family members. And the people who work with or treat those people who have aphasia and their family members. And thank you to our listeners.
For references and resources mentioned in today's show, please see our Show Notes. They’re available on our website, www.aphasiaaccess.org. There you can also become a member of our organization, browse our growing library of materials, and find out about the Aphasia Access Academy. If you have an idea for a future podcast episode, email us at info@aphasiaaccess.org. For Aphasia Access Conversations, I’m Janet Patterson. Thanks again for your ongoing support of Aphasia Access.
Conversations, Gap Areas, References, and Words to Live By
Aphasia Access Conversations
Episode #62 - Identifying gaps in aphasia care and steps toward action: A
conversation with Aphasia Access Board President Liz Hoover
Episode #77: Voltage drop and aphasia treatment: Thinking about the research-
practice dosage gap in aphasia rehabilitation: In conversation with Rob Cavanaugh
Episode #72: Implementation Science, Aphasia, and Sauce: A Conversation with Natalie Douglas
Episode #67: Considering depression in people who have aphasia and their care
partners: In conversation with Rebecca Hunting Pompon
Episode #89: Aphasia is a complex disorder: Mental health, language, and more – A
conversation with Dr. Sameer Ashaie
Episode #84: Interprofessional Practice and Interprofessional Education: In
conversation with Mary Purdy
Episode #69: Motivation and engagement in aphasia rehabilitation: In conversation
with Michael Biel
Episode #88: Everyone’s an expert: Person-centeredness in the clinic and research - A
conversation with Jackie Hinckley
2018 State of Aphasia Report - Gap Areas
1.Insufficient awareness and knowledge of aphasia by health care providers and the wider public
2.Insufficient funding across the continuum of care
3.Insufficient availability of communication intervention for people with aphasia (need for services)
4.Insufficient intensity of aphasia intervention across the continuum of care
5.Insufficient attention to life participation across the continuum of care
6.Insufficient training and protocols or guidelines to aid implementation of participation-oriented intervention across the continuum of care
7.Insufficient or absent communication access for people with aphasia or other communication barriers
8. Insufficient attention to depression and low mood across the continuum of care
9. Lack of a holistic approach to community reintegration
10. Failure to address family/caregiver needs including information, support, counseling, and communication training
References
Fogg, B.J. (2019). Tiny habits: The small changes that change everything. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Loft, M.L., Martinsen, B., Esbensen, B, Mathiesen, L.L., Iversen, H.K. Poulsen, I. (2019). Call for human contact and support: An interview study exploring patients’ experiences with inpatient stroke rehabilitation and their perception of nurses’ and nurse assistants’ roles and functions. Disability and Rehabilitation, 41:4, 396-404, DOI: 10.1080/09638288.2017.1393698
Worrall, L. (2022). The why and how of integrating mental health care into aphasia services. Presentation to The International Aphasia Rehabilitation Conference, Philadelphia PA: June.
Worrall, L. (2019). The seven habits of highly effective aphasia therapists. Presentation to the Aphasia Access Leadership Summit, Baltimore MD: June.
Words to live by
Lache Pas La Patate!
(Don’t Drop the Potato!) This saying means that even when things get difficult, don’t
give up. It is a testament to the resiliency and enduring spirit of the Cajun people. Cajuns are known for their strong family and community values. During difficult times everyone comes together and helps each other out.