American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology Vol.21 S126-S139 May 2012. doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2012/11-0076)
© American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrowCustom Print
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow My Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ferguson, N. F.
Right arrow Articles by Raymer, A. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ferguson, N. F.
Right arrow Articles by Raymer, A. M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Delicious   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Select Papers From the 41st Clinical Aphasiology Conference

A Comparison of Intention and Pantomime Gesture Treatment for Noun Retrieval in People With Aphasia

Neina F. Fergusona,,b
Kelli Evansa
Anastasia M. Raymerc
a University of South Alabama, Mobile
b Sacred Heart Hospital, Pensacola, FL
c Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA

Correspondence to Neina F. Ferguson: nfferguson{at}yahoo.com

Purpose: The effects of intention gesture treatment (IGT) and pantomime gesture treatment (PGT) on word retrieval were compared in people with aphasia.

Method: Four individuals with aphasia and word retrieval impairments subsequent to left-hemisphere stroke participated in a single-participant crossover treatment design. Each participant viewed target nouns on a computer screen in 2 counterbalanced training phases. Training included paired verbal + gesture treatment strategies to elicit verbal and/or gestural productions of target nouns. Treatment effects were measured using daily picture-naming probes for verbal naming and gesture productions for trained and untrained words as well as pre-/posttreatment standardized aphasia tests.

Outcomes and Results: IGT resulted in immediate effects on the verbal productions of 2 participants but lacked carryover to untrained words. PGT resulted in improved verbal production for 2 participants and immediate effects on the gesture productions of 3 participants, with carryover of gesture production to untrained words in 1 participant. Improvements on standardized aphasia tests were evident in 2 participants.

Conclusion: IGT and PGT had positive treatment effects, but for contrasting communication modalities. Two individuals with mild–moderate aphasia improved verbal production with both IGT and PGT, and 2 individuals with severe aphasia improved gesture use with PGT.

Key Words: aphasia, gestural communication, treatment


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Delicious Delicious   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?