Abstract
The effect of treatment dose on recovery of post-stroke aphasia is not well understood.
Inconsistent conceptualisation, measurement, and reporting of the multiple dimensions
of dose hinders efforts to evaluate dose-response relationships in aphasia rehabilitation
research. We review the state of dose conceptualisation in aphasia rehabilitation
and compare the applicability of three existing dose frameworks to aphasia rehabilitation
research – the Frequency, Intensity, Time, and Type principle (FITT), the Cumulative
Intervention Intensity (CII) framework, and the Multidimensional Dose Articulation
Framework (MDAF). The MDAF specifies dose in greater detail than the CII framework
and the FITT principle. On this basis we selected the MDAF to be applied to three
diverse examples of aphasia rehabilitation research. We next critically examined applicability
of the MDAF to aphasia rehabilitation research and identified the next steps needed
to systematically conceptualise, measure, and report the multiple dimensions of dose,
which together can progress understanding of the effect of treatment dose on outcomes
for people with aphasia following stroke. Further consideration is required to enable
application of this framework to aphasia interventions that focus on participation,
personal, and environmental interventions and to understand how the construct of episode
difficulty applies across therapeutic activities used in aphasia interventions.
Keywords
List of abbreviations:
CII (Cumulative Intervention Intensity), FITT (Frequency, intensity, time, and type), ICF (International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health), MDAF (Multidimensional Dose Articulation Framework)To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Archives of Physical Medicine and RehabilitationAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
Article info
Publication history
Accepted:
December 8,
2022
Received in revised form:
November 22,
2022
Received:
May 18,
2022
Publication stage
In Press Journal Pre-ProofIdentification
Copyright
© 2022 by the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine.
