Instrumentos para avaliação da linguagem pós-lesão cerebrovascular esquerda
Instruments for language assessment following a left brain damage
Karina Carlesso Pagliarin; Camila Rosa de Oliveira; Bruna Matias da Silva; Luara de Freitas Calvette; Rochele Paz Fonseca
Resumo
O tema deste estudo é a avaliação padronizada da linguagem em pacientes com lesão cerebrovascular esquerda (LHE) que pode ser muito útil no estabelecimento do diagnóstico, prognóstico e plano terapêutico, complementando observação, entrevistas e tarefas clínicas. Este estudo teve como objetivo identificar quais instrumentos de investigação de linguagem têm sido utilizados para avaliação de quadros neurológicos súbitos envolvendo o hemisfério esquerdo (HE) e analisar quais componentes linguísticos são os mais avaliados. Foi possível identificar nove instrumentos utilizados internacionalmente que avaliam diferentes componentes linguísticos em pacientes com LHE; no contexto nacional, porém, foram encontradas apenas duas baterias para avaliação dessa população, ficando evidente a necessidade da construção e/ou de adaptação de instrumentos para a população brasileira. Os componentes linguísticos mais investigados foram nomeação e compreensão oral, respectivamente. A avaliação da linguagem torna-se essencial nos quadros envolvendo o HE, pois déficits linguísticos podem acarretar prejuízos sociais, ocupacionais e familiares.
Palavras-chave
Abstract
The theme of this study is the language assessment in patients with left brain damage (LBD). It is necessary as it helps to establish the diagnosis, prognosis and rehabilitation planning, adding findings to clinical observation, interview and tasks. The purpose is to identify which language instruments have been used to assess non-progressive neurological disorders involving the left hemisphere (LH) and to analyze which language components are the most assessed ones. It was possible to identify nine international instruments that assess different components of language in LBD patients. In the national context, however, only two batteries to assess this population were found, highlighting the need for construction and/or adaptation of language assessment tools for the Brazilian population. Naming and oral comprehension were the most examined linguistic components, respectively. The evaluation of language is essential in the neurological disorders that affect the LH, because language deficits can lead to an impaired social, occupational and family life.
Keywords
Referencias
1. Van Lancker DV. Rags to riches: our increasing appreciation of cognitive and communicative abilities of the human right cerebral hemisphere. Brain Lang. 1997; 57:1-11.
2. Joanette Y, Goulet P, Hannequin D. Right hemisphere and verbal communication. New York: Springer; 1990.
3. Talarico TR, Venegas MJ, Ortiz KZ. Perfil populacional de pacientes com distúrbios da comunicação humana decorrentes de lesão cerebral, assistidos em hospital terciário. Rev CEFAC. 2011; 13(2):330-9.
4. Rousseaux M, Daveluy W, Kozlowsk O. Communication in conversation in stroke patients. J Neurol. 2010; 257:1099–107.
5. Pedersen PM, Vinter K, Olsen TS. Aphasia after stroke: type, severity and prognosis. The Copenhagen aphasia study. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2004; 17:35-43.
6. Donovan NJ, Kendall DL, Heaton SC, Kwon S, Velozo CA, Duncan PW. Conceptualizing Functional Cognition in Stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2008; 22: 122-35.
7. D'Arcy RCND, Marchand Y, Eskes GA, Harrison ER, Phillips SJ, Major A et al. Electrophysiological assessment of language function following stroke. Clin Neurophys. 2003; 114: 662–72.
8. Kalbe E, Reinhald N, Brand M, Marowitsch H, Kessler J. A new test battery to assess aphasic disturbances and associated cognitive dysfunctions. German Normative data on the aphasia check list. J Clin Exp Neuropsy. 2005; 24: 779-94.
9. Soares ECS, Ortiz KZ. Influence of brain lesion and educational background on language tests in aphasic subjects. Demen Neuropsychol. 2008; 2: 321-7.
10. Helm-Estabrooks N. Aphasia Diagnostic Profiles (ADP). Dallas: PRO-ED; 1992.
11. Nakase-Thompson R, Manning E, Sherer M, Yablon SA, Gontkovsky SLT, Vickery C. Brief assessment of severe language impairments: Initial validation of the Mississippi aphasia screening test. Brain Injury. 2005; 19(9): 685–91.
12. Goodglass H, Kaplan E. Assessment of aphasia and related disorders. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger; 1972.
13. Frattali CM, Thompson C, Holland A, Wohl A, Ferketic M. American-Speech-Language-Hearing Association Functional Assessment of Communication Skills for Adults. Rockville, MD: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, 1995.
14. Benton L, Hamsher S, Sivan A. Multilingual Aphasia Examination (MAE-E). Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society. Cambridge University Press; 1994.
15. Porch B. Porch Index of Comunicative Ability (PICA). Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press; 1981.
16. Hilari K, Northcott S, Roy P, Marshall J, Wiggins RD, Chataway J, Ames D. Psychological distress after stroke and aphasia: the first six months. Clin Rehabil. 2010; 24:181-90.
17. Kertesz A. Western Aphasia Battery. New York: Grune & Stratton; 1982.
18. Goodglass H, Kaplan E, Barresi B. The Assessment of Aphasia and Related Disorders. 3ª ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins; 2001.
19. Radanovic M, Mansur LL. Performance of a Brazilian population sample in the Boston Diagnostic Aphasia Examination. A pilot study. Braz J Med Biol Res. 2002; 35(3): 305-17.
20. Radanovic M, Mansur LL, Scaff M. Normative data for the Brazilian population in the Boston Diagnostic Aphasia Examination: influence of schooling. Braz J Med Biol Res. 2004; 37(11): 1731-8.
21. Joanette, Y., Goulet, P., & Hannequin D. Right hemisphere and verbal communication. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1990.
22. Fonseca RP, Parente MAMP, Côte H, Ska B, Joanette Y. Apresentando um instrumento de avaliação da comunicação à Fonoaudiologia Brasileira: Bateria MAC. Rev Pró-fono. 2008; 285-91.
23. Casarin FS, Pagliarin KC, Koehler C, Oliveira CR, Fonseca RP. Instrumentos de avaliação breve da comunicação: ferramentas existentes e sua aplicabilidade clinica. Rev CEFAC. 2011; 13(5): 917-25.
24. Fonseca RP, Parente MAMP, Côte H, Ska B, Joanette Y. Bateria MAC – Bateria Montreal de Avaliação da Comunicação. São Paulo: Pró-Fono; 2008.
25. Mansur LL, Radanovic M, Taquemori L, Greco L, Araújo GC. A study of the abilities in oral language comprehension of the Boston Diagnostic Aphasia Examination – Portuguese version: a reference guide for the Brazilian population. Braz J Med Biol Res. 2005; 38(2):277-92.
26. Soares ECS, Ortiz KZ. Influence of schooling on language abilities of adults without linguistic disorders. Sao Paulo Med J. 2009; 127(3):134-9.
27. Ortiz KZ, Costa FP. M1-Alpha test in normal subjects with low educational level: a pilot study. J Soc Bras Fonoaudiol. 2011; 23(3):220-6.
28. Ortiz KZ, Ferreira CP, Bento ACP. Aplicação do Teste Beta 86 (protocolo MT modificado) em analfabetos. Fono Atual. 2006; 35: 65-73.
29. Giusti E, Befi-Lopes DM. Tradução e adaptação transcultural de instrumentos estrangeiros para o Português Brasileiro (PB). Rev Pro-Fono. 2008; 20(3): 207-10.
30. Ortiz KZ, Osborn E, Chiari BM. O teste M1-Alpha como instrumento de avaliação da afasia. Rev Pro-Fono. 1993; 23-9.
31. Radanovic M, Mansur LL, Azambuja MJ, Porto CS, Scaff M. Contribution to the evaluation of language disturbances in subcortical lesions. Arq Neuropsiquiatr. 2004; 62(1):51-7.
32. Mansur, Radanovic M, Ruegg D, Mendonça LIZ, Scaff M. Descriptive study of 192 adults with speech and language disturbances. Sao Paulo Med J/Rev Paul Med. 2002; 120(6):170-4.
33. Santos AD, Ortiz KZ. Comparação do desempenho de pacientes afásicos em diferentes testes de compreensão oral. Fon Atual. 2005, 33(8): 26-32.
34. Naeser MA, Martin PI, Lundgren K, Klein R, Kaplan J, Treglia E et al. Improved Language in a Chronic Nonfluent Aphasia Patient After Treatment With CPAP and TMS. Cog Behav Neurol. 2010; 23: 29-38.
35. Dewarrat GM, Anonni J-M, Fornari E, Carota A, Bogousslavsky J, Maeder P. Acute aphasia after right hemisphere stroke. J Neurol. 2009; 256:1461–7.
36. Hegde MN, Freed D. Assessment of communication disorders in adults. San Diego: Plural Publishing; 2011.
37. Huber W, Poeck K, Willmes K. The Aachen Aphasia Test. Adv Neurol.1984; 42:291-303.
38. Code C, Torney A, Gildea E, Willmes K. Outcome of a One-Month Therapy Intensive for Chronic Aphasia: Variable Individual Responses. Semin Speech Lang. 2010; 31(1): 21-33.
39. Szaflarski JP, Ball AL, Grether S, Al-fwaress F, Griffith NM, Neils-Strunjas J, Newmeyer A, Reichhardt R. Constraint-induced aphasia therapy stimulates language recovery in patients with chronic aphasia after ischemic stroke. Med Sci Monit. 2008; 14(5): CR243–CR50.
40. Kay J, Lesser R, Coltheart M. Psycholinguistic Assessment of Language Processing in Aphasia (PALPA): an introduction. Aphasiology. 1996; 10(2): 159-215.
41. Lecours AR, Parente MAMP, Feijó AV, Maia A. Anartria pura: estudo de dois casos. Psico Reflexao Crítica. 2001; 14:367-77.
42. Parente MAMP, Ortiz KZ, Soares-Ishigaki E, Fonseca RP, Joanette Y, Lecours AR, Nespoulous J-L. Bateria Montreal Toulouse de Avaliação da Linguagem (MTL-Brasil). São Paulo: Vetor. no prelo.
43. Fridriksson J, Baker JM, Moser D. Cortical mapping of naming errors in aphasia. Hum Brain Mapp. 2009;30(8):2487-98.
44. Carlomagno S, Pandolf M, Labruna L, Colombo A, Razzano C. Recovery From Moderate Aphasia in the First Year Poststroke: Effect of Type of Therapy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001; 82: 1073-80.
45. van der Meulen I, van de Sandt-Koenderman WM, Duivenvoordene HJ, Ribbers GM. Measuring verbal and non-verbal communication in aphasia: reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change of the Scenario Test. Int J Lang Commun Dis. 2010; 45: 424-35.
46. Machado O, Correia SM, Mansur LL. Performance of normal Brazilian adults in a semantic test: effect of literacy. Pró-Fono. 2007;19 (3): 289-94.
47. Moreira L, Chlottfeld CG, de Paula JJ, Daniel MT, Paiva A, Cazita V, Coutinho G, Salgado JV, Malloy-Diniz LF. Estudo Normativo do Token Test versão reduzida: dados preliminares para uma população de idosos brasileiros. Rev psiquiatr clín. 2011; 38 (3): 97-101.
Submitted date:
22/09/2011
Accepted date:
29/01/2012
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Mendeley
Email