An interventional study of CIAT in Aphasia and Stroke, sponsored by University of Alabama at Birmingham. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 19 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2018-05-11.
Sponsored by University of Alabama at Birmingham · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
The purpose of this study is to test the effectiveness of constraint-induced aphasia therapy.
Aphasia (difficulty speaking) is one of the most dreaded consequences of stroke. It is associated with high mortality and severe motor, social, and cognitive disability. During the past decade, therapies administered by stroke teams have made great strides in limiting the damage due to a stroke. Unfortunately, progress in aphasia rehabilitation has not experienced the same rapid advancement. Evidence suggests that the brain may have untapped potential for recovery of aphasia after stroke.
Using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), researchers now are able to examine the areas of the brain that are responsible for language recovery after stroke. Such data may explain how the brain recovers after stroke, and may lead to new therapies to help individuals who have suffered an aphasia-causing stroke.
In this study, researchers will examine the changes the brain undergoes while recovering from an aphasia-causing stroke and the mechanisms that underlie such recovery, and test the effectiveness of a new and promising method of aphasia rehabilitation called constraint-induced aphasia therapy (CIAT). The scientists will perform fMRI studies of brain activation in people who have suffered an aphasia-causing stroke in order to better understand the underlying mechanisms of recovery from aphasia. Specifically the researchers will compare language activation between adults with stroke and children with perinatal and postnatal stroke (from previous studies); map changes in language activation, characterize the patterns of language reorganization that occur following stroke; and use the fMRI measures to assess recovery using CIAT.
The study will last one year, during this time participants will have language testing to evaluate the degree of aphasia and its recovery; and five fMRI scans scheduled at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 26 weeks, and 56 weeks. Participants with remaining moderate aphasia will be offered a chance to participate in an extension treatment study that will last up to 3 months (STUDY).
A better understanding of brain changes during recovery from aphasia may help develop new methods to improve recovery.
7,286 studies on the registry are indexed under Stroke; 2,007 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 24 is below the median of 50 across 5,369 interventional studies indexed under Stroke.
Browse Stroke studies →University of Alabama at Birmingham is the lead sponsor of 1,396 studies on the registry; 284 are open to participants now.
Of its 156 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 124 (79%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Exclusion Criteria:
Patients with aphasia \>1 year after left MCA stroke who will be randomized to receive CIAT
Behavioral: CIAT
Patients with aphasia \>1 year after left MCA stroke who will be randomized to no intervention (observation)
Patients are to receive constraint-induced aphasia therapy for 2 weeks at 4 hours per day. Detailed description of this intervention is in Szaflarski et al., 2015 Medical Science Monitor.
Also known as: CILT
Primary outcome measure is aphasia improvement.
The Token Test was used only for primary screening and study qualification. All participants received NAT which included: (1) the Boston Naming Test (BNT) (Kaplan, Goodglass et al. 1983), (2) the Controlled Oral Word Association Test (Lezak 1995), (3) the Semantic Fluency Test (SFT) (Kozora and Cullum 1995, Lezak 1995), (4) the Complex Ideation subtest from the Boston Diagnostic Aphasia Examination (BDAE) (Goodglass and Kaplan 1972), (5) the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test III (PPVT III) (Dunn and Dunn 1997), and (6) the Mini-Communicative Activities Log (Mini-CAL) which is a subjective measure of communicative abilities (Pulvermuller, Neininger et al. 2001, Szaflarski, Ball et al. 2008).
Time frame: 1 week and 3 months after intervention
This study is completed, as verified in May 2018. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
University of Alabama at Birmingham