Conversation partner responses to problematic talk produced by people with aphasia: some alternatives to initiating,completing, or pursuing repair

Background: Problems with intersubjectivity (i.e., mutual understanding) are prevalent during interactions involving people with aphasia. The linguistic restrictions imposed by aphasia mean that conversation partners must often assist with repairing intersubjective problems if they are to be resolved efficaciously. However, conversation partners can resist participation in repair activities. This may have serious negative implications for how people with aphasia participate in conversation.

Aims: This study uses conversation analysis (CA) to examine responses to problematic talk produced by people with aphasia. It focuses on three alternatives to initiating, completing, or pursuing repair: receipting responses, accounting responses, and “other” responses. The interactional organisation and consequences of these responses are described.

Methods & Procedures: Three people with aphasia and nine of their familiar conversation partners were video-recorded during their everyday conversations. Approximately 9.5 hr of recordings was collected. Ninety-seven responses were identified in this data set and analysed using collection-based conversation-analytic practices.

Outcomes & Results: Receipting responses register that the person with aphasia has produced a turn, but provide little support for the action implemented by the turn. They do not index problems with intersubjectivity and often result in the problematic talk being abandoned. Accounting responses index problems with intersubjectivity, but do not work towards resolving them. Instead, they deal with why an appropriate response to the problematic talk cannot be delivered, and which party is responsible for its absence. “Other” responses comprise a more eclectic category. One type—non-serious responses—is examined. Non-serious responses take the appearance of repair, but ultimately delay authentic repair attempts.

Conclusions: The responses examined can have negative consequences for the participation of people with aphasia, restricting their ability to implement social action, and making relevant their status as linguistically incompetent. However, they can also help with navigating the sensitive environments created by problems with intersubjectivity. Interaction-focused interventions might focus on these practices in addition to repair practices when attempting to improve how communication breakdown is addressed. CA and qualitative interviewing are well suited to future explorations of how conversation partners decide that they will not initiate, complete, or pursue repair.     

Collaborative participation in aphasic word searching: comparison between significant others and speech and language therapists

Background: Searching for words is a common phenomenon in conversations of people with aphasia. When searching for a word the speaker interrupts the emerging conversational turn with a pause, vocalisation (e.g., uh), and/or a question (e.g., what is it). Previous studies suggest that gazing and pointing can be used to invite conversational partners to join the search.

Aims: This study compares the collaborative actions of different conversational partners of people with aphasia (significant others vs. speech and language therapists) during aphasic word searching. The aphasic speakers’ actions inviting assistance from the partners in the search are also examined.

Methods & Procedures: The data for the study comprised 20 conversations, half videotaped at the participants’ homes and half in aphasia therapy sessions. The conversations were transcribed and analysed sequentially with a special emphasis on taking non-verbal actions into account. In the analysis, word search sequences were identified and the collaborative participation of the significant others, as well as the speech and language therapists, compared.

Outcomes & Results: The analysis showed that institutional and non-institutional conversational partners collaborate in different ways during word searching. When invited to join the search, often non-verbally, the significant others quickly offer words for the aphasic speakers to complete the search. When successful, these immediate completions solve the search and the core conversation can continue. On the other hand, even if invited non-verbally, speech and language therapists do not join in searching by offering words. Instead, they ask questions or offer their candidate understandings that are more elaborate than one word. Furthermore, they regularly shift the speaking turn back to the aphasic speaker encouraging the aphasic speaker to continue the search by him or herself.

Conclusions: The institutional and everyday practices of sequential resolutions of word searching differ to a great extent. Everyday conversational practices of collaborative completion appear more effective in solving the search and allow the aphasic speaker to experience smoothly flowing conversational interaction. Everyday practices could also be systematically used within aphasia therapy. Furthermore, if necessary, speech and language therapists should promote the use of these practices within daily interactions of the aphasic clients and their significant others.     

Development of a procedure to evaluate the contributions of persons with aphasia and their spouses in an interview situation

Background: Although there has been increasing interest in the study of conversations between people with aphasia and their partners, the participation of persons with aphasia in conversation with their spouses in the presence of a third party has not been extensively investigated. Nevertheless, opportunities for such situations are frequent, and therefore provide an interesting opportunity to examine how couples collaborate.

Aims: (1) To develop a procedure to analyse conversations that would specifically address the contributions of persons with aphasia and their spouses in an interview situation. (2) To describe spousal contributions in an interview situation, including what preceded and followed these contributions, in a group of couples with a member with aphasia. (3) To verify the inter‐judge reliability of the procedure.

Methods & Procedures: Videos of three couples with aphasia in an interview situation were analysed. Contributions of the spouse when the participant with aphasia was clearly speaking with the interviewer, contexts in which spouses contributed, reactions of persons with aphasia, and their participation following contributions were described. Definitions were created, operationalised, tested, and refined on 11 other similar couples in the same interactive situation. Eight other couples were then videotaped and studied.

Outcomes & Results: Results revealed that half the contributions produced by the spouse were “repairs” and the other half were “speaking for” behaviours. Most often, contributions were unsolicited. Generally, the person with aphasia approved the spouse's contribution and continued afterwards to take an active part in the conversation. Inter‐judge reliability coefficients varied between 89% and 97%.

Conclusions: The procedure employed is representative of situations encountered by couples affected by aphasia. The data collection and analysis methods could be applicable to clinical situations. It is important to consider spousal contributions and their impact on the person with aphasia in conversations when helping couples adjust to the consequences of aphasia.     

Implementing and evaluating aphasia therapy targeted at couples' conversations: A single case study

Background: In recent years conversation has become an area of interest for aphasia therapy, with several studies using conversation analysis (CA) to target and evaluate therapy. Most of these studies have focused on the main conversation partner of the person with aphasia, and in particular have targeted the partner's pedagogic behaviours in relation to the person with aphasia. Evaluations of therapy have primarily taken the form of qualitative analyses of change in conversational behaviours.

Aims: This single-case intervention study aims to advance research into interaction-focused intervention for aphasia in the following ways: by targeting intervention at the person with aphasia and the main conversation partner as a couple; by focusing on conversational behaviours where the person with aphasia can be seen to be restricted by the conversational actions of the conversation partner, in particular by recurrent questioning using closed questions and yes/no interrogatives; and by using a novel combination of qualitative and quantitative approaches to evaluate the intervention.

Methods & Procedures: CA was used to target and evaluate interaction-focused intervention for a couple where one partner has aphasia. Evidence for change was evaluated using qualitative and quantitative evidence of change in conversational behaviours; evidence from naïve raters of pre- and post-intervention conversation extracts; and interview/other feedback from the conversation partner.

Outcomes & Results: There was evidence that the intervention had changed the couple's conversational behaviours. In particular, the conversational behaviours of the non-aphasic partner were in general less restricting for the person with aphasia in that she was now using fewer questions and more instance of other types of turns, such as paraphrases. Following intervention the person with aphasia had also changed in that he was now producing turns that had more sentences, or attempts at sentences, and which developed the topic of talk across several of his turns.

Conclusions: The study provides evidence that directly targeting the conversational behaviours of the person with aphasia and/or a main conversational partner can produce positive change, and can achieve this in a way that is ecologically valid. In particular, it highlights the usefulness of targeting conversational behaviours that are proving to be maladaptive for the participants. It provides further evidence that creating change in the non-aphasic partner's conversational behaviour may facilitate change in the person with aphasia's conversational and linguistic performance.     

Word retrieval therapies in primary progressive aphasia

Background: Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) with its three variants is a progressive neurodegenerative dementia in which language impairment is the first and most dominant symptom. Traditionally, speech-language pathologists who deliver therapy to adults with acquired neurogenic language disorders shy away from treatment of progressive aphasia as there is no promise of lasting effects and only limited data regarding treatment efficacy.

Aims: This paper comprises the most current review of the literature focused on treatment of naming impairments in PPA, and aims to encourage and assist clinicians in selecting intervention approaches for individuals with PPA. It highlights current trends and challenges in delivering successful therapy for naming deficits in PPA.

Main Contribution: We reviewed papers that reported different forms of naming therapy for patients with PPA, which included interventions that, although not always aimed directly at anomic deficits, brought about improvement in naming. Immediate gains, maintenance, and generalisation effects are summarised, along with a variety of approaches and methodologies that can be applied to the PPA population. We also provide a list of factors that were found to contribute to the success of therapy and to the maintenance and/or generalisation of treatment gains.

Conclusions: Current literature delivers encouraging evidence for clinicians wanting to provide naming therapy to patients with PPA. Although PPA is a progressive disorder, both the immediate treatment effects and, in many cases, maintenance results show that improvements are possible. The issues of generalisation of naming gains beyond the clinician’s office still require more studies to determine the best conditions, designs, and patient suitability.     

Relearning lost vocabulary in nonfluent progressive aphasia with MossTalk Words®

Background: The literature on aphasia has been growing rapidly, with reports of different therapeutic approaches for a post‐stroke anomia. While individuals with post‐stroke anomia frequently recover to some extent, the other end of the aphasia recovery continuum is occupied by those who experience relentless language dissolution as a result of progressive disorders such as primary progressive aphasia. One of the most recent additions to the field of aphasia rehabilitation is therapy whereby either part of or the entire therapy is administered via computer‐based programmes. There have been few treatment studies investigating the rehabilitation of language abilities in people with primary progressive aphasia (PPA).

Aims: The objectives of this investigation were to examine the ability of PPA individuals to relearn lost words and to determine the extent of benefits derived from MossTalk Words®, a computer‐based treatment for anomia.

Methods and Procedures: Using a multiple baseline across behaviours design, we explored treatment‐specific effects, maintenance, and generalisation of improvements derived from this therapy programme. Two participants with nonfluent PPA were treated, each on three lists of words for which low and stable baselines were first established. Sessions occurred two to three times a week. Treatment involved the presentation of a picture on the computer screen, with the participants being required to name it. Success in treatment was measured by probing list naming every second session. Once a participant attained 80% accuracy over two consecutive probes, or participated in 12 sessions (whichever occurred first), treatment of a list was terminated and the next list was started. Each participant was tested on all items immediately after therapy, and again 1 month later.

Outcomes and Results: Both participants improved their naming skills with the MossTalk Words®. P1 required only four sessions to reach the proposed criterion of 80% (up to 100%) correct on each list. The effects of treatment were maintained immediately and, to a lesser degree, 4 weeks later. P2 required all 12 sessions for each of the three lists. Results were variable immediately after testing, but seemingly maintained 4 weeks later.

Conclusions: The results demonstrate that both participants with primary progressive aphasia benefited (although to a different extent) from a computer‐based treatment for anomia. These results are encouraging and suggest that such a treatment may be a viable therapy approach for patients who suffer from PPA in the absence of a generalised cognitive impairment.     

Can impairment-focused therapy change the everyday conversations of people with aphasia? A review of the literature and future directions

Background: The ultimate goal in any programme of aphasia rehabilitation is that behaviours targeted in therapy will generalise to everyday use for people with aphasia (PWA). The pervasiveness of conversation in everyday life has undoubtedly contributed to the recent interest in aphasiology regarding how we facilitate, and capture evidence of, change in conversation following therapy. Given the rich nature of conversation data, various analytical approaches have been utilised within impairment-focused therapy studies; however, much of this work has been carried out in isolation from other methodologies such as conversation analysis (CA)—a field which has historically concerned itself with conversation data. The result is a growing literature base which is dispersed in nature. For clinicians who are faced with the daily challenge of therapeutic management for a diverse population of PWA the literature on generalising therapy gains to everyday conversation may be too unwieldy to be of benefit to current clinical practice.

Aims: This paper aims to synthesise and critically review key papers from impairment-focused studies which have investigated the impact of therapy on the conversations of PWA. For the purposes of this review, conversation is defined as a dialogue between the person with aphasia and a conversation partner.

Main Contribution: First, the motivation to investigate conversation within aphasia assessment is discussed, with consideration of how conversation differs from, but ultimately complements, other forms of language assessment. Following this, five impairment therapy studies will provide a platform for discussion of methodological issues and analytical approaches relating to conversation data. Finally, consideration is given to how researchers and clinicians may build on current literature to develop the use of conversation as an outcome measure in aphasia intervention. Where appropriate, insights are drawn from interaction-focused therapy studies regarding the collection and analysis of conversation data.

Conclusions: There is emerging evidence that impairment-focused therapy can impact on the conversations of PWA. While these early findings are promising, investigations have been limited to naming therapies and the methods of data collection used have implications for ecological validity. Incorporating particular elements of interaction-focused approaches may help to inform data collection, investigations of therapy outcome, and issues of candidacy for specific treatments. Furthermore, combining therapeutic and analytical approaches is likely to be more closely akin to the clinical reality of aphasia intervention, where clinicians are likely to use all resources at their disposal in the rehabilitation of a speaker with aphasia.     

Candidacy for conversation partner training in aphasia: findings from a Dutch implementation study

Background: Aphasia rehabilitation should comprise a family-centred approach, involving main conversation partners in the rehabilitation process as soon as possible. A standardised approach to conversation partner training (CPT) became available in the Netherlands with the release of Partners of Aphasic clients Conversation Training (PACT). PACT was introduced in clinical practice in a multi-centre implementation study with 34 participating dyads.

Aims: To explore candidacy for CPT by describing the characteristics of dyads where the conversation partner engaged in CPT and to identify which characteristics had the potential to predict benefit of PACT.

Methods and Procedures: A pre-post treatment design was used in a multi-centre study. Pre- and post-CPT measures of psychosocial characteristics (caregiver burden, depression and coping) from the partner and behavioural characteristics (cognitive, linguistic and communicative) from the person with aphasia (PWA) were collected. Partner experience was assessed using four scales from the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory. Pre-post measures were analysed using paired T-tests and Wilcoxon signed ranks tests. Multiple regression analyses were used to assess potential predictors of training outcomes.

Outcomes and Results: Partners of people with moderate to severe aphasia engaged in PACT when it was first introduced in clinical practice (N = 34 dyads). Mean time post-onset was 11.5 months. Partners enjoyed the practical training in which they actively engaged through experiential learning methods. Partner scores increased significantly over the intervention time on task-oriented and avoidance-oriented coping skills and their symptoms of depression lowered significantly. Caregiver esteem was found to be a positive predictor of feelings of competence and enjoyment with the training. Older partners enjoyed the training less. More effort was given to the training by the partner when the aphasia was more severe.

Conclusions: This study found that partners are willing to engage in CPT once the PWA returned home and the dyads were engaging in more everyday conversations in their home environment. The results underline the importance of partner characteristics, such as motivation, coping style and a positive outlook on caregiving as possible selection criteria for CPT.     

Therapy for naming deficits in two variants of primary progressive aphasia

Background: Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) refers to a progressive and selective decline in language due to neurodegenerative disease. There are three variants of PPA, progressive nonfluent aphasia (PNFA), semantic dementia (SD), and logopaenic progressive aphasia (LPA). All variants include impaired object naming, but distinct underlying deficits might interfere with naming. Therefore, individuals with different types of PPA may respond differently to naming therapy.

Aims: To identify differences in patterns of success and generalisation in response to the same treatment in patient with LPA and a patient with SD. Furthermore, we wished to identify whether the treatment effect was item specific (trained words) or generalised to untrained words in trained or untrained categories.

Methods & Procedures: Participants included an individual with LPA and one with SD. An assessment of lexical processing was administered before and after a naming treatment to assess underlying deficits and generalisation effects. Therapy consisted of a cueing hierarchy treatment. Treatment items consisted of pictured objects in the categories of fruits/vegetables and clothing.

Outcomes & Results: Two different patterns of performance were observed. The LPA participant improved in naming of treated items and untreated items in both treated and untreated categories. The participant with SD improved in naming treated items only, but showed less deterioration in untreated items in treated than untreated categories.

Conclusions: Individuals with PPA can show improved naming (at least temporarily) with therapy, but generalisation to untrained items may depend on the underlying cause of the naming deficit, which may differ across subtypes.     

The contribution of working memory to language comprehension: differential effect of aphasia type

Background: Experimental studies of short-term memory and working memory (WM) in aphasia fail to discriminate cognitive impairments of different aphasia types—non-fluent, Broca-type aphasia and fluent, Wernicke-type aphasia. However, based on the varying fundamental features of these two aphasia syndromes, the potentially different underlying mechanisms of impairment and scant preliminary evidence of varying cognitive deficits, a differential relationship between cognitive function and language processing in these two groups can be predicted.

Aims: The current study investigates the hypothesis concerning the differential impact of cognitive impairments in individuals with fluent versus non-fluent aphasia types.

Methods & Procedures: Participants with fluent (n = 19) and non-fluent (n = 16) aphasia and participants without brain damage (n = 36) were presented with an eye-tracking WM task. Additionally, individuals with aphasia completed two language comprehension tasks.

Outcomes & Results: Results revealed significant decrease in WM capacity in individuals with aphasia compared with participants without brain damage. The two aphasia groups performed similarly on the WM and language tasks. Furthermore, for participants with non-fluent aphasia, it was revealed that WM makes a significant contribution to language comprehension, while for fluent individuals this relationship was not significant.

Conclusions: Overall, the present data support the claim that there are cognitive deficits in aphasia and that these cognitive deficits tend to exacerbate the language impairments of persons with non-fluent aphasia types. The results are discussed in the context of varying mechanisms of impairment in different types of aphasia. The present findings have important implications both for the assessment and the treatment of individuals with aphasia and for understanding the nature of aphasia.     

The patterns of progression in primary progressive aphasia—Implications for assessment and management

Background: Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is a progressive language disorder with preserved cognitive function for at least 2 years from onset. The main variants currently distinguished are: non-fluent/agrammatic (nfvPPA), semantic (svPPA), and logopenic (lvPPA). Patients with initial language presentation may subsequently develop other symptoms, such as behavioural dysfunction or apraxia. The clinical pattern of PPA depends on the location of atrophy, the underlying pathology, and the stage of the disease.

Aims: This review aims at characterising longitudinal changes in clinical presentations of different PPA variants and at presenting implications of these changes for the assessment, diagnosis, and management.

Main contribution: The three PPA variants differ not only in terms of language impairment, but also with regard to cognitive and behavioural profile. Apraxia and rigidity frequently occur in the course of nfvPPA. Patients with lvPPA seem to follow the pattern of aphasic Alzheimer’s disease, where language impairment is accompanied by episodic memory deficit. Individuals diagnosed with svPPA often develop behavioural dysfunction similar to that observed in behavioural variant of frontotemporal dementia.

Conclusions: Implications for patient care are dependent on PPA variant and on the stage of the disease. In svPPA, emphasis should be on the management of semantic and behavioural problems in daily life. Caregivers of nfvPPA patients should be informed about the possible emergence of apraxia and other movement disorders. In contrast, families of individuals with lvPPA should be made aware of and trained to cope with an episodic memory decline and possible progression to other varieties of PPA.     

Questioning in conversations before and after communication partner training for individuals with traumatic brain injury

Background: Social communication training involving individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI) and their everyday communication partner(s) facilitates improvements in the quality of their interactions and information transfer. Recent research has indicated that the ways conversation partners use questions may play an important role in this improvement.

Aims: This study aimed to describe questioning patterns during casual conversations before and after communication partner training using Conversation Analysis.

Methods & Procedures: Samples of casual conversations involving four individuals with TBI and their everyday communication partners were examined. These samples were collected before and after intervention in the course of a larger clinical trial investigating the efficacy of a communication partner training program entitled TBI Express. Four dyads were chosen based on their Adapted Kagan Scale scores; a primary outcome measure in the clinical trial. Two dyads with the greatest change on these scales (“Kagan plus”) and two dyads with the least change (“Kagan neutral”) were selected. Approximately 10 minutes of casual conversations per dyad were transcribed in detail. Questions in each sample were identified and analysed qualitatively using conversation-analytic practices, focusing on aspects of sequence organisation.

Outcomes & Results: “Kagan plus” dyads had obvious changes in their questioning practices following training. These changes facilitated selection of topics and the development of related talk, i.e., improved communication. Conversely, the “Kagan neutral” dyads exhibited less obvious differences in their questioning practices after training, which meant that improved communication in the postintervention samples was less apparent.

Conclusions: The present study provides detailed insight into how everyday communication partners’ questioning practices contribute to communicative success. This information has the potential to help clinicians assess and improve interactions involving individuals with TBI and their everyday communication partners.     

Understanding and living with primary progressive aphasia: Current progress and challenges for the future

Background: Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is a progressive language disorder in which aphasia is the first and most prominent symptom of degenerative brain disease. PPA has received increasing attention in the scientific literature over the past 30 years, but there remains a relative lack of awareness and understanding of it in the wider clinical community. As editors of the volume, Clinical Perspectives on Primary Progressive Aphasia, we invited the contributing authors to provide an up-to-date survey of research on a range of topics that are relevant to clinical practice in PPA.

Aims: The aim of this article is to address some key questions that may arise when an individual receives a diagnosis of PPA and to direct readers to additional sources of information in this volume and elsewhere that will allow them to gain further knowledge about topics of interest.

Main Contribution: We address the following questions: (1) What is PPA? (2) How is PPA diagnosed? (3) What happens to a person’s language when they have PPA? (4) How will the disease progress over time? (5) How does PPA impact a person’s life and the life of their family and friends? (6) What treatments and support are available? (7) What other services should we be providing?

Conclusions: Considerable progress has been made in our understanding of PPA and the relationship between the symptomatology, progression, pathology, and genetics of PPA. However, there are many challenges remaining, particularly in terms of ensuring that people with PPA and their families and friends receive optimal information and support at diagnosis and appropriate interventions and/or management strategies throughout their journey with PPA.     

Longitudinal imaging and deterioration in word comprehension in primary progressive aphasia: Potential clinical significance

Background: Three variants of primary progressive aphasia (PPA), distinguished by language performance and supportive patterns of atrophy on imaging, have different clinical courses and the prognoses for specific functions. For example, semantic variant PPA alone is distinguished by impaired word comprehension. However, sometimes individuals with high education show normal performance on word-comprehension tests early on, making classification difficult. Furthermore, as the condition progresses, individuals with other variants develop word-comprehension deficits and other behavioural symptoms, making distinctions between variants less clear. Longitudinal brain imaging allows identification of specific areas of atrophy in individual patients, which identifies the location of disease in each patient.

Aims: We hypothesised that the areas of atrophy in individual PPA participants would be closely correlated with the decline in word comprehension over time. We propose that areas where tissue volume is correlated with word comprehension are areas that: (1) are essential for word comprehension, (2) compensate for word comprehension in some individuals with semantic variant PPA early in the course, and (3) show atrophy in individuals with logopenic and nonfluent variant PPA only late in the course.

Methods and Procedures: Fifteen participants with PPA (five logopenic variant PPA; eight semantic variant PPA; two nonfluent/agrammatic variant PPA; mean age 67.8), underwent high resolution magnetic resonance imaging and cognitive tests at least 9 months apart. The correlations between change in regional volumes and change in auditory word-comprehension scores were investigated using Spearman test.

Outcomes & Results: While scores on auditory word comprehension at Time 1 were correlated with volume loss in right and left temporal pole and left inferior temporal cortex (areas of atrophy associated with semantic variant PPA), deterioration in auditory word comprehension from Time 1 to Time 2 was associated with individual atrophy in left middle temporal cortex, left angular gyrus, and right inferior and middle temporal cortex.

Conclusions: Progressive atrophy in focal areas surrounding left temporal pole and left inferior temporal cortex, and right homologous area is closely related to progressive decline in auditory word comprehension. These correlations likely reflect areas that compensate for subtle deficits early in the course of semantic variant PPA, as well as areas that are critical for auditory word comprehension that eventually atrophy in individuals with other variants of PPA. Individual patterns of atrophy also help us understand and predict the clinical course of individuals, such as associated behavioural or motor deficits.     

Treatment of aphasia through family member training

Background: Studies describing communication between people with aphasia and family members have suggested that family members are not always skilled communication partners. For example, spouses or significant others sometimes adopt conversational strategies that do not facilitate communication with their aphasic loved one. Therefore, management of aphasia should address the communication skills of regular communication partners in order to maximize communication with individuals with aphasia.Aims: This study was designed to provide communication training to the wife of a man with aphasia in order to reduce the occurrence of her behaviors identified as “nonfacililative.” Nonfacilitative behaviors of the wife included spouse interruptions, convergent questions and negative teaching.Methods & Procedures: A single subject multiple baseline design examined the effects of training on the occurrence of three nonfacilitative behaviors across several conditions (spontaneous conversation in the clinic, discussion of television programs in the clinic and conversation at home).Outcomes & Results: Training the spouse resulted in reduced occurrence of the target behaviors (spouse interruptions, convergent questions) in probes of the training condition (news discussions). These improvements consistently generalized from the treatment situation to untrained conditions such as spontaneous conversations with her husband. In addition, this improvement was observed in an untrained behavior (negative teaching). Improvements in both trained and untrained behaviors were maintained on follow-up probes. Furthermore, this training resulted in improvements not only in the spouse's conversational interaction, but also in her aphasic husband's expressive communication during their conversations even though he was not included in the training.Conclusions: Direct training of interactive behaviors of a speaking partner might be an effective and efficient means of enhancing communication between family members and people with aphasia.     

Patterns of decline in naming and semantic knowledge in primary progressive aphasia

Background: Individuals with primary progressive aphasia (PPA) and their caregivers want to know what to expect so that they can plan support appropriately. The ability to predict decline in naming and semantic knowledge, and advise individuals with PPA and their caregivers regarding future planning, would be invaluable clinically.

Aims: The aims of this study were to investigate patterns of decline in naming and semantic knowledge in each of the clinical variants of PPA (logopenic variant PPA, lvPPA; nonfluent agrammatic PPA, nfaPPA; and semantic variant PPA, svPPA) and to examine the effects of other variables on rate of decline. We hypothesized that speech-language rehabilitation, higher education, and higher baseline test scores would be associated with slower decline, and older age with faster decline.

Methods and Procedures: A total of 94 participants with PPA underwent language testing, including 36 participants with lvPPA, 31 participants with nfaPPA, and 27 participants with svPPA. All participant groups were similar in age and education. We focused on decline on three tests: the short form of the Boston Naming Test (BNT), the Hopkins Assessment of Naming Actions (HANA), and the short form of the Pyramids and Palm Trees Test (PPTT).

Outcome and Results: Across language tests, the most precipitous rates of decline (loss of points per month) occurred in nfaPPA, followed by svPPA, then lvPPA. Female sex, longer symptom duration, higher baseline test score, and speech-language rehabilitation were associated with slower decline.

Conclusions: PPA variants were distinguishable by rapidity of decline, with nfaPPA having the most precipitous decline. As hypothesized, higher baseline test scores and speech-language rehabilitation were associated with slower decline. Surprisingly, age and education were not important prognostically for individuals in this study. Further study of prognostically-relevant variables in PPA is indicated in this population.     

Biomarkers in the primary progressive aphasias

Background: Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is a progressive disorder of language that is increasingly recognised as an important presentation of a specific spectrum of neurodegenerative conditions.

Aims: In an era of etiologically specific treatments for neurodegenerative conditions, it is crucial to establish the histopathologic basis for PPA. In this review, I discuss biomarkers for identifying the pathology underlying PPA.

Main Contribution: Clinical syndromes suggest a probabilistic association between a specific PPA variant and an underlying pathology, but there are also many exceptions. A considerable body of work with biomarkers is now emerging as an important addition to clinical diagnosis. I review genetic, neuroimaging and biofluid studies that can help determine the pathologic basis for PPA.

Conclusions: Together with careful clinical examination, there is great promise that supplemental biomarker assessments will lead to accurate diagnosis of the pathology associated with PPA during life and serve as the basis for clinical trials in this spectrum of disease.