<i>‛It's all communication’</i>: Family members’ perspectives on the communication needs for themselves and their relatives with primary progressive aphasia
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Communication disabilities, such as primary progressive aphasia (PPA), impact family members as well as the individuals with the condition. To provide adequate communication care to people with PPA (PwPPA) and their family members, it is crucial to understand the communication needs from the family members' perspectives. To date, research on the communication needs of people with primary progressive aphasia and their family members from the perspectives of family members has been limited. AIMS: The specific research objectives were to explore (a) the communication needs pertaining to PwPPA in the early, middle and late stages; and (b) the communication needs pertaining to family members of PwPPA in the early, middle and late stages, from the perspectives of family members. METHODS & PROCEDURES: This study employed a qualitative description approach, underpinned by the pragmatic paradigm. Data collection involved semi-structured qualitative interviews with eight family members (relatives of four individuals with the logopenic variant of PPA, of two individuals with the nonfluent variant of PPA, of one individual with the semantic variant of PPA and of one individual with mixed PPA). Qualitative content analysis was used to identify codes and categories in relation to the research objectives. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Qualitative content analysis revealed eight categories of communication needs pertaining to the PwPPA: person-specific needs; diagnosis and disclosure; general communication difficulties; impact on communication in everyday life; impact on cognition; impact on psychosocial well-being; impact on person's dignity and autonomy; and future planning. Six categories were identified pertaining to the family members: information about and awareness of PPA; impact of communication difficulties on family/others; increased responsibilities for the family in everyday life; impact on psychosocial well-being; and future planning. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: This investigation has expanded our knowledge in the area by providing insights about communication needs which speech-language pathologists and other health professionals should be aware of and take into account when providing communication care to PwPPA and their families. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Person- and family-centred communication care is optimally guided by the person's and family's needs and values. Research on communication care for people with primary progressive aphasia has underscored the inclusion of family members. Previous research has investigated the impact and experiences of living with primary progressive aphasia from the family member perspective. What this paper adds to existing knowledge To date, research focusing on identifying the communication needs of people with primary progressive aphasia and their family members from the perspective of family members is limited. This study adds the family members' perspectives on the communication needs pertaining to themselves and their relatives with primary progressive aphasia in the early, middle and late stages of primary progressive aphasia. What are the potential or clinical implications of this work? Several clinical implications have been raised. Family members experience communication needs for themselves and should be included as recipients of communication care. Clinicians supporting people with primary progressive aphasia should be cognizant of the impact of communication fatigue on everyday life and therapy tasks. Communication care for this population should include communication partner training, support for psychosocial well-being and support with communication around future planning.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».