Telerehabilitation

5.17 Aphasia rehabilitation can include telerehabilitation. 

References: Cacciante et al., 2021: Systematic review and meta-analysis of 5 studies; Cetinkaya et al., 2023: Systematic review of 31 studies (11 group studies, 12 pre-post studies, 8 single-subject studies); Hall et al., 2013: Systematic review of 4 studies (3 SCEDs, 1 multiple baseline experimental design); Weidner & Lowman, 2020: Systematic review of 13 studies (5 SCED, 4 pre-post group studies, 2 quasi-experimental research designs, 1 quasi randomised controlled feasibility study, 1 randomised clinical trial)

NHMRC Level of Evidence: I

Rationale: There is an emerging evidence base for using telerehabilitation in aphasia rehabilitation. This may improve service access for people in both rural/remote areas as well as those with difficulties accessing services in metropolitan areas (e.g., people with transport or mobility difficulties).

Several systematic reviews and a meta-analysis of previous research (reporting on a range of study types, including randomised controlled trials and single-case studies) have concluded that telerehabilitation is feasible and effective for people with aphasia and can therefore be a suitable addition or alternative to conventional in-person therapy (Cacciante et al., 2021; Cetinkaya et al., 2023; Hall et al., 2013; Weidner & Lowman, 2020). RCT-level research has found that telerehabilitation intervention is as effective as in-person interventions for a range of language domains, including auditory comprehension, word naming, and functional communication (Cacciante et al., 2021). 

While telerehabilitation is generally feasible (Hall et al., 2013), it may be less suitable for some people, e.g., due to vision/hearing loss, or fine motor difficulties (Cetinkaya et al., 2023) and is dependent on adequate equipment (e.g., laptop, tablet) and sufficient quality of internet connection (Hall et al. 2013).

References: 

1. Cacciante, L., Kiper, P., Garzon, M., & Baldan, F. (2021). Telerehabilitation for people with aphasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Communication Disorders, 92, 106111–106111. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcomdis.2021.106111
2. Cetinkaya, B., Twomey, K., Bullard, B., EL Kouaissi, S., & Conroy, P. (2023). Telerehabilitation of aphasia: A systematic review of the literature. Aphasiology, 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2023.2274621
3. Hall, N., Boisvert, M., & Steele, R. (2013). Telepractice in the assessment and treatment of individuals with aphasia: A systematic review. International Journal of Telerehabilitation, 5(1), 27-38. DOI: 10.5195/ijt.2013.6119 
4. Weidner, K., & Lowman, J. (2020). Telepractice for adult speech-language pathology services: A systematic review. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Group, 5(1), 326-338. DOI: 10.1044/2019_PERSP-19-00146