OBJECTIVE: To determine how well the consensus criteria could classify subjects with primary progressive aphasia (PPA) using a quantitative speech and language battery that matches the test descriptions provided by the consensus criteria.
METHODS: A total of 105 participants with a neurodegenerative speech and language disorder were prospectively recruited and underwent neurologic, neuropsychological, and speech and language testing and MRI in this case-control study. Twenty-one participants with apraxia of speech without aphasia served as controls. Select tests from the speech and language battery were chosen for application of consensus criteria and cutoffs were employed to determine syndromic classification. Hierarchical cluster analysis was used to examine participants who could not be classified.
RESULTS: Of the 84 participants, 58 (69%) could be classified as agrammatic (27%), semantic (7%), or logopenic (35%) variants of PPA. The remaining 31% of participants could not be classified. Of the unclassifiable participants, 2 clusters were identified. The speech and language profile of the first cluster resembled mild logopenic PPA and the second cluster semantic PPA. Gray matter patterns of loss of these 2 clusters of unclassified participants also resembled mild logopenic and semantic variants.
CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative application of consensus PPA criteria yields the 3 syndromic variants but leaves a large proportion unclassified. Therefore, the current consensus criteria need to be modified in order to improve sensitivity.

暂无摘要。

In order to distinguish more accurately and easily between language difficulties in need of therapy or special support versus language impairments a S2K guideline was developed by interdisciplinary teams of different (medical) societies and professional associations. This guideline was published in 2011 and has replaced all existing monodisciplinary guidelines. According to the new S2K guideline standardised measures of language testing are mandatory. Apart from reviewing the S2K guidelines, this article aims to suggest how these guidelines can be established in clinical practice. By closely following this new guideline, testing and diagnosing children with language difficulties is believed to be enhanced considerably, and also comply with quality management standards.

Primary progressive aphasia comprises a heterogeneous group of neurodegenerative conditions with diverse clinical profiles and underlying pathological substrates. A major development has been the publication of the recent International Consensus Criteria for the three major variants namely: semantic, non-fluent/agrammatic and logopenic. The logopenic variant is assumed to represent an atypical presentation of Alzheimer pathology although evidence for this is, at present, limited. The semantic and non-fluent/agrammatic variants are largely associated with frontotemporal lobar degeneration with TDP-43 and tau pathology, respectively. The applicability of the International Consensus Criteria to an unselected clinical sample is unknown and no agreed clinical evaluation scale on which to derive the diagnosis exists. We assessed 47 consecutive cases of primary progressive aphasic seen over a 3-year period in a specialist centre, using a newly developed progressive aphasia language scale. A subgroup of 30 cases underwent (11)C-labelled Pittsburgh Compound B positron emission tomography imaging, a putative biomarker of Alzheimer\'s disease that detects β-amyloid accumulation, and they were compared with an age-matched group (n = 10) with typical, predominately amnestic Alzheimer\'s disease. The application of an algorithm based on four key speech and language variables (motor speech disorders, agrammatism, single-word comprehension and sentence repetition) classified 45 of 47 (96%) of patients and showed high concordance with the gold standard expert clinical diagnosis based on the International Consensus Criteria. The level of neocortical β-amyloid burden varied considerably across aphasic variants. Of 13 logopenic patients, 12 (92%) had positive β-amyloid uptake. In contrast, one of nine (11%) semantic variant and two of eight (25%) non-fluent/agrammatic cases were positive. The distribution of β-amyloid across cortical regions of interest was identical in cases with the logopenic variant to that of patients with typical Alzheimer\'s disease although the total load was lower in the aphasic cases. Impairments of sentence repetition and sentence comprehension were positively correlated with neocortical burden of β-amyloid, whereas impaired single-word comprehension showed a negative correlation. The International Consensus Criteria can be applied to the majority of cases with primary progressive aphasic using a simple speech and language assessment scale based upon four key variables. β-amyloid imaging confirms the higher rate of Alzheimer pathology in the logopenic variant and, in turn, the low rates in the other two variants. The study offers insight into the biological basis of clinical manifestations of Alzheimer\'s disease, which appear topographically independent of β-amyloid load.

OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to investigate the frequency with which school-based speech-language pathologists (SLPs) used recommended practices when assessing the language skills of bilingual students. The study also investigated the frequency with which SLPs used formal, standardized tests versus informal, alternative procedures with this population.
METHODS: A total of 596 surveys were mailed out to school-based SLPs in the state of Michigan who were members of the Michigan Speech, Language, and Hearing Association (MSHA) during the 2003-2004 academic year. Of the 409 usable surveys that were returned, 130 respondents indicated being involved in assessing bilingual children and comprised the sample used in this study.
RESULTS: Results indicated that SLPs used formal, standardized English tests more frequently than informal assessment procedures when assessing bilingual students. Further in-depth analyses of SLPs\' responses indicated that neither factors related to their years of experience or factors related to their academic preparation were significantly related to their use of recommended assessment practices. However, significant differences in use were noted based on respondents\' employment settings.
CONCLUSIONS: This study underscores the need for academic training programs and professional organizations to intentionally disseminate information regarding the expediency of alternative testing procedures. Implications for the adequate nonbiased assessment of bilingual children are discussed.

Patients with limited education or underdeveloped vocabulary skills may perform below the normal range on the Boston Naming Test when compared to the original published norms, even in the absence of brain damage. To reduce the frequency of false positive dysnomic classifications of patients with limited vocabulary skills, we developed a score adjustment to account for the significant shared variance between scores on this test and the WAIS-R Vocabulary subtest. Vocabulary significantly predicted performance on the Boston Naming Test (r = .65, p < .0001) in a sample of 62 outpatients who had no objective evidence of brain damage. Linear regression was used to derive expected performance on the Boston Naming Test from Vocabulary scaled scores. Relative to the original published norms, scores based on the Vocabulary subtest cut-offs produced fewer false positives and more accurately classified group membership for patients with and without objectively verified brain damage. These performance predictions are offered as tentative guidelines to assist clinicians in evaluating the presence of naming deficits by controlling for the variance associated with knowledge of vocabulary.

暂无摘要。