Naming vs. non-naming treatment in aphasia in a group setting–A randomized controlled trial

Abstract

IntroductionAnomia affects numerous persons with aphasia. Treatment effects of anomia group therapy have been reported, but the evidence is not comprehensive. This study aimed to explore treatment effects of a naming treatment compared with a non-naming treatment delivered in a group setting. MethodsIn a randomized controlled trial, 17 participants with chronic poststroke aphasia underwent group therapy, 2 hours a session, 3 times per week, for a total of 20 hours. The treatment given in the naming group was modified semantic feature analysis (SFA). Treatment content in the non-naming group comprised auditory comprehension, copying text, and reading. The primary outcome measure was accuracy in confrontation naming of participant-selected trained nouns and verbs. Generalization effects were evaluated in single-word naming, connected speech, and everyday communication. ResultsParticipants in both groups significantly improved their naming of trained items. There were no differences between the groups. The treatment effect did not remain at follow-up 10 weeks after therapy. No other statistically significant changes occurred in either group. ConclusionsGroup intervention can improve naming ability in individuals with chronic aphasia. However, similar treatment effects can be achieved using a non-naming treatment as using a naming treatment, such as modified SFA. Further research is warranted to identify the most important elements of anomia group therapy.