Precision rehabilitation for aphasia by patient age, sex, aphasia severity, and time since stroke? A prespecified, systematic review-based, individual participant data, network, subgroup meta-analysis.
Stroke
aphasia
individual participant data
network meta-analysis
rehabilitation
speech and language therapy
Journal
International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society
ISSN: 1747-4949
Titre abrégé: Int J Stroke
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101274068
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2022
12 2022
Historique:
pubmed:
16
4
2022
medline:
23
11
2022
entrez:
15
4
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Stroke rehabilitation interventions are routinely personalized to address individuals' needs, goals, and challenges based on evidence from aggregated randomized controlled trials (RCT) data and meta-syntheses. Individual participant data (IPD) meta-analyses may better inform the development of precision rehabilitation approaches, quantifying treatment responses while adjusting for confounders and reducing ecological bias. We explored associations between speech and language therapy (SLT) interventions frequency (days/week), intensity (h/week), and dosage (total SLT-hours) and language outcomes for different age, sex, aphasia severity, and chronicity subgroups by undertaking prespecified subgroup network meta-analyses of the RELEASE database. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and trial registrations were systematically searched (inception-Sept2015) for RCTs, including ⩾ 10 IPD on stroke-related aphasia. We extracted demographic, stroke, aphasia, SLT, and risk of bias data. Overall-language ability, auditory comprehension, and functional communication outcomes were standardized. A one-stage, random effects, network meta-analysis approach filtered IPD into a single optimal model, examining SLT regimen and language recovery from baseline to first post-intervention follow-up, adjusting for covariates identified 959 IPD (25 RCTs) were analyzed. For working-age participants, greatest language gains from baseline occurred alongside moderate to high-intensity SLT (functional communication 3-to-4 h/week; overall-language and comprehension > 9 h/week); older participants' greatest gains occurred alongside low-intensity SLT (⩽ 2 h/week) except for auditory comprehension (> 9 h/week). For both age-groups, SLT-frequency and dosage associated with best language gains were similar. Participants ⩽ 3 months post-onset demonstrated greatest overall-language gains for SLT at low intensity/moderate dosage (⩽ 2 SLT-h/week; 20-to-50 h); for those > 3 months, post-stroke greatest gains were associated with moderate-intensity/high-dosage SLT (3-4 SLT-h/week; ⩾ 50 hours). For moderate-severe participants, 4 SLT-days/week conferred the greatest language gains across outcomes, with auditory comprehension gains only observed for ⩾ 4 SLT-days/week; mild-moderate participants' greatest functional communication gains were associated with similar frequency (⩾ 4 SLT-days/week) and greatest overall-language gains with higher frequency SLT (⩾ 6 days/weekly). Males' greatest gains were associated with SLT of moderate (functional communication; 3-to-4 h/weekly) or high intensity (overall-language and auditory comprehension; (> 9 h/weekly) compared to females for whom the greatest gains were associated with lower-intensity SLT (< 2 SLT-h/weekly). Consistencies across subgroups were also evident; greatest overall-language gains were associated with 20-to-50 SLT-h in total; auditory comprehension gains were generally observed when SLT > 9 h over ⩾ 4 days/week. We observed a treatment response in most subgroups' overall-language, auditory comprehension, and functional communication language gains. For some, the maximum treatment response varied in association with different SLT-frequency, intensity, and dosage. Where differences were observed, working-aged, chronic, mild-moderate, and male subgroups experienced their greatest language gains alongside high-frequency/intensity SLT. In contrast, older, moderate-severely impaired, and female subgroups within 3 months of aphasia onset made their greatest gains for lower-intensity SLT. The acceptability, clinical, and cost effectiveness of precision aphasia rehabilitation approaches based on age, sex, aphasia severity, and chronicity should be evaluated in future clinical RCTs.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Stroke rehabilitation interventions are routinely personalized to address individuals' needs, goals, and challenges based on evidence from aggregated randomized controlled trials (RCT) data and meta-syntheses. Individual participant data (IPD) meta-analyses may better inform the development of precision rehabilitation approaches, quantifying treatment responses while adjusting for confounders and reducing ecological bias.
AIM
We explored associations between speech and language therapy (SLT) interventions frequency (days/week), intensity (h/week), and dosage (total SLT-hours) and language outcomes for different age, sex, aphasia severity, and chronicity subgroups by undertaking prespecified subgroup network meta-analyses of the RELEASE database.
METHODS
MEDLINE, EMBASE, and trial registrations were systematically searched (inception-Sept2015) for RCTs, including ⩾ 10 IPD on stroke-related aphasia. We extracted demographic, stroke, aphasia, SLT, and risk of bias data. Overall-language ability, auditory comprehension, and functional communication outcomes were standardized. A one-stage, random effects, network meta-analysis approach filtered IPD into a single optimal model, examining SLT regimen and language recovery from baseline to first post-intervention follow-up, adjusting for covariates identified
RESULTS
959 IPD (25 RCTs) were analyzed. For working-age participants, greatest language gains from baseline occurred alongside moderate to high-intensity SLT (functional communication 3-to-4 h/week; overall-language and comprehension > 9 h/week); older participants' greatest gains occurred alongside low-intensity SLT (⩽ 2 h/week) except for auditory comprehension (> 9 h/week). For both age-groups, SLT-frequency and dosage associated with best language gains were similar. Participants ⩽ 3 months post-onset demonstrated greatest overall-language gains for SLT at low intensity/moderate dosage (⩽ 2 SLT-h/week; 20-to-50 h); for those > 3 months, post-stroke greatest gains were associated with moderate-intensity/high-dosage SLT (3-4 SLT-h/week; ⩾ 50 hours). For moderate-severe participants, 4 SLT-days/week conferred the greatest language gains across outcomes, with auditory comprehension gains only observed for ⩾ 4 SLT-days/week; mild-moderate participants' greatest functional communication gains were associated with similar frequency (⩾ 4 SLT-days/week) and greatest overall-language gains with higher frequency SLT (⩾ 6 days/weekly). Males' greatest gains were associated with SLT of moderate (functional communication; 3-to-4 h/weekly) or high intensity (overall-language and auditory comprehension; (> 9 h/weekly) compared to females for whom the greatest gains were associated with lower-intensity SLT (< 2 SLT-h/weekly). Consistencies across subgroups were also evident; greatest overall-language gains were associated with 20-to-50 SLT-h in total; auditory comprehension gains were generally observed when SLT > 9 h over ⩾ 4 days/week.
CONCLUSIONS
We observed a treatment response in most subgroups' overall-language, auditory comprehension, and functional communication language gains. For some, the maximum treatment response varied in association with different SLT-frequency, intensity, and dosage. Where differences were observed, working-aged, chronic, mild-moderate, and male subgroups experienced their greatest language gains alongside high-frequency/intensity SLT. In contrast, older, moderate-severely impaired, and female subgroups within 3 months of aphasia onset made their greatest gains for lower-intensity SLT. The acceptability, clinical, and cost effectiveness of precision aphasia rehabilitation approaches based on age, sex, aphasia severity, and chronicity should be evaluated in future clinical RCTs.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35422175
doi: 10.1177/17474930221097477
pmc: PMC9679795
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Review
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1067-1077Références
Stroke. 2022 Mar;53(3):956-967
pubmed: 34847708
PLoS One. 2018 Jul 10;13(7):e0200096
pubmed: 29990345
Res Synth Methods. 2016 Sep;7(3):236-63
pubmed: 26754852
BMJ. 1997 Dec 13;315(7122):1610-4
pubmed: 9437284
Stroke. 2003 Apr;34(4):987-93
pubmed: 12649521
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1998 Feb;41(1):172-87
pubmed: 9493743
BMJ. 2010 Apr 20;340:c1718
pubmed: 20406866
PLoS Med. 2015 Jul 21;12(7):e1001855
pubmed: 26196287
N Engl J Med. 2007 Nov 22;357(21):2189-94
pubmed: 18032770
J Clin Epidemiol. 2015 Nov;68(11):1325-35
pubmed: 26186982
Stat Med. 2020 Jul 10;39(15):2115-2137
pubmed: 32350891
BMJ. 2010 Feb 05;340:c221
pubmed: 20139215
Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2014 Nov;9(6):521-8
pubmed: 24131371
Stat Methods Med Res. 2018 May;27(5):1351-1364
pubmed: 27487843
Stroke. 2021 May;52(5):1778-1787
pubmed: 33719515
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Jun 01;(6):CD000425
pubmed: 27245310
Ann Oncol. 2017 Oct 1;28(10):2327-2330
pubmed: 28961849
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2019 Nov;33(11):959-969
pubmed: 31674274
Int J Speech Lang Pathol. 2011 Feb;13(1):3-10
pubmed: 21329405
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2019 Sep 2;19(1):183
pubmed: 31477023
BMJ. 2010 Feb 15;340:c365
pubmed: 20156912
Annu Rev Stat Appl. 2019 Mar;6:263-286
pubmed: 31073534
Int J Stroke. 2018 Oct;13(8):863-880
pubmed: 30270762