Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Make your likes visible on Facebook?

Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.

No, thanks

Phonological Components Analysis

No description
by

Li Tang

on 9 May 2014

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Phonological Components Analysis

Description
PCA
: A phonological components treatment approach that aims to strengthen activations within the lexical system in order to promote word retrieval

Used with people with aphasia, more specifically those with naming difficulties

Clinician elicits phonological features of the target item according to 5 specified categories (phonological components)

Background
PCA

is modeled after
SFA
basis of
SFA
--> spreading activation theory
Minimum threshold level needs to be activated for the correct production
Aim is to strengthen activations by establishing features of the target
Feature generation (choice) stimulates deeper processing
Perhaps the phonological level is organized in a manner similar to the semantic system
PCA

was developed to serve as a phonological comparison for the
SFA
approach -- compare relative effects of both types of therapies
Critical Evaluation
Suggested Modifications
Case Study
The Client
:
58-year-old woman suffered
L temporal lobe infarct
Fluent with circumlocutions
Auditory comprehension relatively intact
Gets frustrated when unable to retrieve a word
Prior to her stroke:
enjoyed going for jogs with her dog and husband
spent a lot of time baking cakes
was an avid gardener
enjoyed social outings with her friends such as shopping & manicures
It is now 9 months post-stroke, the SLP will be using
PCA

Leonard (2008)
Van Hees (2013)
Feasibility
Effectiveness
Cost and resource effective
Equally feasible to SFA approach (based off SFA model)
70% demonstrated noticeable treatment effects
30% who did not attain greater than 40% accuracy on the second list were not moved on to the final list
Cost and resource effective
Equally feasible to SFA approach (based off SFA model)

Need to consider if there were any influences by using SFA and PCA for all participants
7/8 participants showed significant improvements using PCA
Critical Evaluation Cont'd
Leonard (2008)
Van Hees (2013)
guided throughout each step of treatment process
presented on a visual board
visual and oral information
requires a computer
clinician guides patient through treatment
very similar procedure to article by Leonard et al. (2008)
visual and oral information
not done in study
easy to follow at home
may need to train a partner to help guide the process
needs to be able to generate cues
not done in study
easy to follow at home
may need to train a partner to help guide the process
needs to be able to generate cues
Study Modifications
Therapy Modifications
random control study
more focused group; types of aphasia, severity, main impairments
larger sample size
include at home component
have cut off point similar to article #1
selection of word lists: choose word lists based on participant interest
set amount of time
Conclusion
Van Hees (2013)
Leonard (2008)
Ease with which patients can understand the procedure




Patients’ ability to continue treatment at home






Controlled variables
Generalization
Scoring

Out of the 7 participants, 6 maintained improvement 2-3 weeks follow up
only one participant showed generalization on untreated items
Scoring was not stated


Details of the Studies
Patient’s were scored on-line.

Discussion
Here is a list of potential target words for therapy. Out of these options, we chose
dog
and
cake
. Can you think of reasons why we chose these words as opposed to others?

Maintenance was seen for 6 patients
at 4 weeks follow up.
Pre and post tx scores were compared using the PNT
3 out of the 7 patient's showed some generalization
Criterion was not stated

Treatment was continued regardless of the number of correct responses
Criterion
Leonard (2008)
Van Hees (2013)
The pt. could only move on to treatment of a word list if they got 80% correct over 2 successive sessions or 15 sessions max.
Patient’s who did not receive 40% correct on list 2, Tx was terminated
Activity
In pairs, one student will be the "clinician"
and one student will be the "patient".

The "
clinician
" chooses one target word and employs the PCA technique with their "
patient
". Follow the steps outlined on the handout.

The "
patient
" will respond to the "
clinician's
" questions. But feel free to make mistakes when asked to generate a feature of the target word.

When you are done, switch roles, and repeat steps.

Tracking
PEDRo
Cues
# of Sessions
Participants
Take Home Points:
Pros and cons to using PCA
Neither study contains a high level of evidence
Always keep the individual in mind
(Therapy modifications, word selection & willingness to participate)

17-170 months post-stroke
single left CVA
Aphasia
41-69 years old

All had:
English as a first or primary language prior to stroke
Right handed
Normal or corrected-to normal vision and hearing
No history of any other neurological disease or disorder, mental illness, head trauma, alcoholism, cerebral tumour or abscess, or
any significant cognitive deficits (e.g. memory, attention)
No reported history of moderate to severe apraxia of speech or dysarthria


verbal (list of 3 words were read aloud, repetition)
visual (list of 3 words were displayed and response is written on a chart)
rhymes, first sound first, sound associate, final sounds and # of syllables
3 treatment sessions/ week
12 treatment sessions (6 SFA, 6 PCA)
Results
7 of the 8 participants showed significant improvements in naming items
Phonological Components Analysis
Group:

Lidia, Li, Kathiga, Sehrish, Lynsey, and Candice


1 year post-stroke
Single left CVA
Aphasia
Average age of 62 years

All had:
Normal vision and hearing
No history of neurological disease or psychiatric disorder, alcoholism or substance abuse
English speaking
OME was conducted to rule out AOS
Right handed
Not receiving speech therapy at the time of testing
verbal (list of 3 words were read aloud, repetition)
visual (list of 3 words were displayed and response is written on a chart)
rhymes, first sound, first sound associate, final sounds and # of syllables
3 treatment sessions/ week
1 hour each
7/10 patient's showed improvement in naming after treatment
be
garden
manicure
cake
hello
baking
dog
Full transcript