June 17, 2008 Features

Aphasia and AAC

Enhancing Communication Across Health Care Settings
by Joanne P Lasker & Kathryn L Garrett
see also

Online AAC Resources

References

Focus on Divisions

Sonya is a 72-year-old retired accountant who had a large, lefthemisphere stroke one week ago. She is currently a patient in an
acute-care hospital. She was unresponsive for three days after
her stroke, but now she seems to recognize her husband and
family members. She produces undifferentiated sounds without
specific words, but she is not able to respond to questions or
communicate her needs. She cannot answer yes/no questions
and seems confused when people talk to her.
Mary Ann is a 56-year-old homemaker who has been
participating for two weeks in speech-language treatment in an
inpatient rehabilitation hospital. Her expressive and receptive
language skills are severely impaired due to aphasia. She attempts to communicate with a few
isolated words ("yeah," "but") and vague gestures. She matches pictures to words with about 70%
accuracy. Her husband is very frustrated when he tries to understand her in conversation.
Hernando is a 62-year-old retired mechanic who lives in an assisted living facility. He had a lefthemisphere stroke four years ago. His pattern of speech is characteristic of moderate Broca's
aphasia with significant apraxia of speech. Conversation with Hernando is difficult because his
communication attempts are fragmented and incomplete. His speech is limited to phrases of one or
two words that often contain paraphasias, and he searches his pockets and wallet for scraps of
information to help him during conversations. At times he tries to write to convey ideas, but
frequently misspells words.
Sonya, Mary Ann, and Hernando represent clients with aphasia who might be seen by speechlanguage pathologists working in intensive care, acute-care hospitals, inpatient and outpatient
rehabilitation hospitals, and assisted living facilities. Aphasia is an acquired language impairment
that occurs typically as a result of left hemisphere stroke. Although traditional speech-language
treatment improves speaking and listening skills for many people with aphasia (Holland, et al.,
1996; Wertz et al., 1981), some individuals live with severe and persistent communication
challenges. Augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) offers specific strategies to help
people with severe aphasia communicate more effectively in their current communication settings,
as they make the transition through care in a hospital, in rehabilitation centers, and at home.

Defining AAC
AAC for people with aphasia goes beyond "talking boxes" and picture boardsit is a
comprehensive collection of communication strategies that provide external support for people who
cannot understand or generate messages on their own (Garrett & Lasker, 2005). A recent ASHA
knowledge and skills document (ASHA, 2002) defines AAC as "a set of procedures and processes
by which an individual's communication skills (i.e., production as well as comprehension) can be
maximized for functional and effective communication" (ASHA, 2002, p. 2).
An AAC treatment approach means focusing on communication and participation rather than on
recovery of speech alone. This type of treatment may feel unfamiliar to clinicians who typically
employ "stimulation" models of aphasia treatment. In this article, we respond to the most common
clinical questions about how to assess and treat these unique clients using an AAC framework. In
addition, we direct clinicians to more detailed resources related to aphasia and AAC.

Classifying AAC Users

AAC strategies are not universally applicable to everyone who has severe aphasia. We have
developed a clinically based system for describing the communication behaviors of people with
aphasia so that SLPs have a better idea of which AAC strategies to consider in treatment. This
clinical taxonomy is shown in Figure 1 and is currently being validated (Garrett & Lasker, 2005).
Communicators who must rely on their conversational partners to manage informational demands
and provide communication choices within highly familiar contexts are described as "partnerdependent communicators." Communication partners may need to augment interactions for these
individuals by restructuring questions, offering choices, and supplementing auditory input with
graphic symbols. Partner-dependent communicators can seldom retrieve symbols (e.g. spoken
words, gestures, text, pictorial symbols) or initiate communication on their own.
Individuals whose language and executive function are relatively preserved, but who have a
significant apraxia of speech and moderate aphasia, may be candidates for more sophisticated
speech-generating devices (SGDs) or strategies. These individuals typically comprehend much of
what is said to them with little contextual support. They can initiate communication and convey
ideas using a variety of self-selected strategies and modalities. Without focused clinical intervention
and implementation of AAC strategies, however, these "independent" communicators may
experience frequent communication breakdowns. With treatment, they can learn to use both natural
communication strategies (e.g., speech, residual writing, drawing) and AAC strategies (e.g.,
pointing to elements of a picture to elaborate on a topic, finding messages stored in a
communication notebook or SGD, spelling, drawing) to communicate effectively in multiple
environments with a variety of communication partners.
One of the purposes of AAC-based intervention is to help people with severe aphasia develop their
skills so that they can move from partner-dependence to greater independence. In fact, the
taxonomy is defined by a sequence of strategies that help the person progress along the continuum
of independence. There is, however, no guarantee that all clients will become independent
communicators.
We have developed a clearly delineated set of assessment procedures that includes a complete needs
assessment, the Multimodal Communication Screening Test for Aphasia (Garrett & Lasker, 2005;
Lasker & Garrett, 2006); the AAC-Aphasia taxonomy; and an AAC systems trial protocol. Readers

are referred to Lasker, Garrett, & Fox (2007) for a thorough discussion of the AAC-Aphasia
Assessment protocol. Assessment materials may be downloaded from the AAC Web site.

Emerging/Contextual Communicators
For communicators in acute-care hospital or rehab settings like Sonya, described above, partners
play an important role in supporting effective communication. SLPs may implement several
graphically based strategies with these individuals and their communication partners, but two of the
most powerful conversational tools are Augmented Input (Garrett & Beukelman, 1992, 1998;
Sevcik et al., 1991; Wood et al., 1998) and the Written Choice Conversation Strategy (Garrett &
Beukelman, 1992, 1995; Lasker et al., 1997).
Partner-Dependent Strategy #1: Augmented Comprehension (Input) Techniques
For people with aphasia who have poor comprehension, communication partners can supplement
their spoken language by gesturing, writing key words, or drawing. This set of strategies, called
"augmented input" or "augmented comprehension" strategies, can be implemented whenever the
communicator with aphasia is having difficulty comprehending conversational questions,
comments, or instructions.
The communication partner first identifies that the communicator has misunderstood after carefully
observing the person's blank facial expression, ambiguous head nods, or incorrect responses. The
partner then reiterates the message while simultaneously using one or more augmented input
strategies. The partner may point to the item being discussed; gesture symbolically (e.g., throwing
hand over shoulder to indicate "away from here"); pantomime an event; show photographs,
drawings, or other diagrams; or write key words and topics.
Partner-Dependent Strategy #2: Written-Choice Conversation
This technique requires the facilitator to generate written key-word choices that relate to a
conversational topic. The person with severe aphasia participates by pointing to the choices, thereby
making his or her opinions and preferences known. Partners can ask basic social or medical
questions (e.g., "Who visited this weekendyour husband, daughter, a friend, or no one?" or "What
do you needblanket, pain medicine, or TV?").
Questions also can be highly specific, particularly if they pertain to personal memories, beloved
hobbies, or detailed knowledge associated with a past career. When facilitators present a sequence
of related questions, interactions lengthen and communicators can discuss topics in greater depth
than when the strategy is not used (Garrett, 1993). Variants of the written-choice conversation
approach include presenting choices in the form of points on a rating scale or locations on a map.

Transitional Communicators
A person such as Mary Ann may best be classified as a transitional communicator according to the
AAC-Aphasia taxonomy. Like many other people with aphasia who may be in the rehabilitation
stage of recovery, she demonstrates improved awareness, comprehension, automatic speech, and
desire to communicate.
Transitional communicators, however, have significant speech-language production deficits (e.g.,
apraxia of speech, anomia, encoding breakdowns) that mask their desire and ability to converse. In
addition, they may not yet have the cognitive ability to initiate use of communication systems

containing previously stored, symbolized messages. A number of transitional communication

strategies that minimize linguistic demands can help people like Mary Ann initiate communication,
including stored message retrieval, remnants and topic-setters (Garrett & Huth, 2002; Ho et al.,
2005), and storytelling (Stuart, 2000).
Transitional Strategy #1: Stored Message Retrieval
To promote initiation and symbol use, individuals can practice accessing a small selection of stored
messages on either low-tech, picture-text communication boards or SGDs to gain the attention of a
listener ("Can you help me with this?"), explain their communication disability ("I have aphasia,
please give me time to answer you"), ask simple questions ("When is my husband coming?"),
provide specific answers ("I have two children who are both physicians"), or comments ("I don't
like this TV show"). Practice should occur in highly contextual situations using authentic
communication scenarios (e.g., conversation groups, role plays of talking with a doctor).
Transitional Strategy #2: Topic Initiation
For topic initiation training, the clinician first collaborates with the family member to identify a
graphic symbol or remnant that is personally relevant to the individual. The symbol can be a
souvenir, family reunion photo, headline and photo from a newspaper, or menu from a favorite
restaurant. An SGD capable of storing a single digitized message can be programmed with a
favorite or trademark phrase such as "Go Noles!" for the diehard football fan. Communication
partners are cued to pose questions, such as "What's new?" The person with aphasia is then
encouraged to show the remnant or activate the SGD to begin an interaction.
Transitional Strategy #3: Storytelling
People with aphasia can use communication boards, books, or symbol sequences on an SGD to tell
simple stories that are personally relevant. Communicators learn to activate messages on a board or
device using a left-to-right symbol sequence. The cognitive demands are minimal; the person with
aphasia does not need to search for a symbol from a complex array. Most importantly, this approach
offers rich opportunities for communication output and participation. Mary Ann, described at the
outset of this piece, recounted the humorous story of her first date with her husband of 35 years to
aphasia group members on Valentine's Day.
One application for storytelling in conversation is Visual Scenes technology (Dietz et al., 2006;
McKelvey et al., 2007). A personally relevant, contextual photograph of an event or gathering is
displayed (e.g., reunion, favorite musician) accompanied by printed comments ("I actually met BB
King once!") or questions ("Do you like blues music?"). The photograph and text symbols represent
whole messages. Low-technology starter visual scenes (templates and manual) are available on the
AAC Web site. Visual scenes templates are also available on the DynaVox Series 5 devices.

Long-Term AAC Approaches

AAC-oriented treatment for individuals like Hernando begins with a thorough needs assessment to
determine appropriate communication goals and identify message topics. For example, a needs
assessment may indicate that a communicator wishes to resume conducting bank transactions
independently or to participate in a weekly card game. Independent communicators like Hernando
are able to initiate communication, recognize and categorize picture symbols, and comprehend
familiar written words and phrases. They may attempt novel utterances by using incomplete
spelling or writing and symbolic gestures. In general, their communication is fragmented and

inefficient, but they are persistent communicators who will try anything to convey their message.
With independent communicators like Hernando, the following AAC strategies can be effective.
Independent Strategy #1: Stored Message Retrieval Strategies
Communicators first can learn to access symbolized pre-stored messages within simple, scripted
routines such as calling for assistance over the telephone with an SGD. Supported by a
communication card, wallet, or SGD, they can practice introducing themselves to others in a group.
When asked a question in conversation, they can learn to search for responses from previously
answered written choice questions, a simplified communication notebook, or a single display on an
SGD containing life stories symbolized with photographs.
Independent Strategy #2: Multimodal Communication
Some people with severe aphasia who can spell and/or combine symbols (pictures, text, and
orthography) learn to navigate with relative ease through pages on a dynamic display SGD to
initiate conversation, ask and answer conversational questions, explain or clarify, share novel ideas,
and conduct transactions in the community. Most independent communicators need instruction and
support with spelling, including abbreviations and the use of a word-prediction tool on an SGD.
They benefit from practicing how to combine symbols, letters, stored messages, and other unaided
communication modalities to convey their ideas in a specific community situation; role-playing is
often a tool to practice these skills.
Although independent communicators may not use voice-output systems exclusively, producing a
spoken message with an SGD can get attention, convey specific information, or facilitate phone
communication. The "final" AAC system may consist of an SGD in combination with a variety of
other communication tools, including the client's residual natural speech, use of unaided strategies,
a communication notebook, and other remnants, such as ticket stubs or a list of family members'
names and contacts. (For more information about considerations for selecting an SGD for clients
with aphasia and funding options, see the sidebar on p. 11 for links to Web-exclusive material on
those topics.)

Evidence for AAC Use

The documentation of effective AAC device use in "real-life" settings by people with aphasia
continues to evolve. King and Hux (1995) reported on a client with aphasia who used a talking
word-processor program to improve the quality of his written production. Some studies have
described ongoing AAC interventions with clients presenting with primary progressive aphasia
(Cress & King, 1999; Murray, 1998). A few studies have described AAC technology that has been
successful in improving conversations and daily interactions for people with chronic aphasia
(Waller et al., 1998; Lasker & Bedrosian, 2001; van de Sandt-Koenderman et al., 2004; Lasker et
al., 2005; McKelvey et al., 2007).
Encouraging AAC Use
Sometimes clients and family are reluctant to use AAC strategies because they view these as
"giving
up" on speech recovery. It is difficult for clinicians to alter fundamental attitudes and perceptions
held by clients and families, but we can educate them about the powerful communication potential
offered by partner-dependent conversation strategies, natural strategy use (e.g. gesture, drawing,
writing), and voice-output devices. We occasionally can alter negative attitudes toward "artificial"

communication by describing AAC strategies and devices as a means of practicing functional

speech as well as providing communication support (Weinrich et al., 1995).
Clinicians also can refer to the growing body of literature on the functional use of voice-output
technology in combination with natural speech to re-engage in important life activities (Lasker et
al., 2005; Lasker et al., in press). Often acceptance is influenced by when and how AAC approaches
are introduced to clients. We tend to avoid introducing complex SGDs at the earliest stages of
aphasia recovery. After some time has elapsed, clients and families often are able to think more
realistically about how AAC strategies might help accomplish particular communication goals.
Throughout the health care continuum, a variety of AAC-oriented treatment strategies can enhance
communication and participation for people living with severe aphasia, provided SLPs have
matched the skills and capabilities of the users carefully with appropriate strategies. In addition,
these strategies help clients participate more effectively in their own rehabilitation. We invite SLPs
to review other resources on this topic and to broaden the scope of therapeutic intervention for
people with aphasia to include partner-supported, transitional, and independent AAC techniques.
Author's note: This article is adapted from Garrett, K. L., & Lasker, J. P. (2007). AAC and severe
aphasia: Enhancing communication across the continuum of recovery. Perspectives on
Neurophysiology and Neurogenic Speech and Language Disorders, 17, 615.
Joanne P Lasker, is an associate professor at Florida State University in Tallahassee, where she
focuses on acquired neurological disorders and AAC. She and Kathryn Garrett developed the
Multimodal Communication Screening Test for People with Aphasia. Contact her at
jlasker@fsu.edu.
Kathryn L Garrett, specializes in the evaluation and treatment of individuals with aphasia and other
acquired neurologic communication disorders via her own private practice, Alternative
Communication Therapies, in Pittsburgh, Pa. Contact her at garrett.kathryn@gmail.com.
cite as: Lasker, J. P. & Garrett, K. L. (2008, June 17). Aphasia and AAC : Enhancing
Communication Across Health Care Settings. The ASHA Leader.

Online AAC Resources

Information about device selection, Medicare SGD/AAC funding, Frequently Asked Questions
Information about SGD fast facts, funding programs, general resources, and AAC Report Coach
Information about Medicare funding and links to other ASHA resources
Information and materials on AAC-Aphasia assessment

References

Aftonomos, L. B., Steele, R. D., Appelbaum, J. S., & Harris, V. M. (2001). Relationships
between impairment-level assessments and functional-level assessments in aphasia: Findings from
LCC treatment programs. Aphasiology, 15(10-11), 951964.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2002). Augmentative and alternative
communication: Knowledge and skills for service delivery [Knowledge and Skills].
Cress, C., & King, J. (1999). AAC strategies for people with primary progressive aphasia without
dementia: Two case studies. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 15(4), 248259.
Dietz, A., McKelvey, M., & Beukelman, D. R. (2006). Visual scene displays (VSD): New AAC
interfaces for persons with aphasia. Perspectives in AAC, 15, 1317.
Garrett, K. (1993). Changes in the interaction patterns of individuals with severe aphasia given
three types of partner support. Dissertation Abstracts International.
Garrett, K. L., & Beukelman, D. R. (1992). Augmentative communication approaches for persons
with severe aphasia. In K. Yorkston (Ed.) Augmentative communication in the medical setting (pp.
245338). Tucson, AZ: Communication Skill Builders.
Garrett, K. L. & Beukelman, D. R. (1995). Changes in the interaction patterns of an individual
with severe aphasia given three types of partner support. In M. Lemme (Ed.), Clinical aphasiology
(Vol. 23). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Garrett, K. L., & Beukelman, D. R. (1998). Adults with severe aphasia. In D. R. Beukelman & P.
Mirenda (Eds.), Augmentative and alternative communication: Management of severe
communication disorders in children and adults (2nd ed., pp. 465499). Baltimore, MD: Paul H.
Brookes.
Garrett, K. L., & Lasker, J. P. (2007). AAC and severe aphasia: Enhancing communication
across the continuum of recovery. Perspectives on Neurophysiology and Neurogenic Speech and
Language Disorders, 17, 615.
Garrett, K., & Huth, C. (2002). The impact of graphic contextual information and instruction on
the conversational behaviors of a person with severe aphasia. Aphasiology, 16(4/5/6), 523536.
Ho, K. M., Weiss, S.J., Garrett, K.L., & Lloyd, L.L. (2005). The effect of remnant and
pictographic communication books on the interactions of individuals with global aphasia.
Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 21, 218232.
Holland, A. (1998). Functional outcome assessment of aphasia following left hemisphere stroke.
Seminars in Speech and Language, 19, 24959.
Holland, A. L., Fromm, D. S., DeRuyter, F., & Stein, M. (1996). Treatment efficacy: Aphasia.
Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 39, S27S36.
King, J. M., & Hux, K. (1995). Intervention using talking word processing software: An aphasia
case study. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 11, 187192.

Koul, R. K., & Harding, R. (1998). Identification and production of graphic symbols by
individuals with aphasia: Efficacy of a software application. Augmentative and Alternative
Communication, 14, 1123.
Lasker, J. P, & Bedrosian, J. L. (2001). Promoting acceptance of augmentative and alternative
communication by adults with acquired communication disorders. Augmentative and Alternative
Communication, 17(3), 141153.
Lasker, J., Hux, K., Garrett, K., Moncrief, E., & Eischeid, T. (1997). Variations on the Written
Choice communication strategy for individuals with severe aphasia. Augmentative and Alternative
Communication, 13, 108116.
Lasker, J. P., LaPointe, L. L., & Kodras, J. (2005). Helping a professor with aphasia resume
teaching through multimodal approaches. Aphasiology, 19(3/4/5), 399410.
Lasker, J. P., Stierwalt, J. A. G., Hageman, C. F., & LaPointe, L. L. (in press). Using motor
learning guided theory and augmentative and alternative communication to improve speech
production in profound apraxia: A case example.
McCall, D., Shelton, J. R., Weinrich, M., & Cox, D. (2000). The utility of computerized visual
communication for improving natural language in chronic global aphasia: Implications for
approaches to treatment in global aphasia. Aphasiology, 14(8), 795826.
Murray, L. L. (1998). Longitudinal treatment of primary progressive aphasia: A case study.
Aphasiology, 12(7), 651672.
Sevcik, R., Romski, M. A., & Wilkinson, K. (1991). Roles of graphic symbols in the language
acquisition process for persons with severe cognitive disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative
Communication, 7, 161170.
Steele, R., Weinrich, M., Wertz, R., Kleczewska, M., & Carlson, G. (1989). Computer-based
visual communication in aphasia. Neuropsychologia, 27, 409426.
Stuart, S. (2002). Understanding the storytelling of older adults for AAC system design.
Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 16(1), 112.
van de Sandt-Koenderman, M. W. M. E. (2004). High tech AAC and aphasia: Widening
horizons? Aphasiology, 18(3), 245263.
Waller, A., Dennis, F., Brodie, J., & Cairns, A. Y. (1998). Evaluating the use of TalksBac, a
predictive communication device for nonfluent adults with aphasia. International Journal of
Language & Communication Disorders, 33, 4570.
Weinrich, M., McCall, D., Weber, C., Thomas, K., et al. (1995). Training on an iconic
communication system for severe aphasia can improve natural language production. Aphasiology, 9,
343364.
Wertz, R., Collins, M., Weiss, D., Kurtzke, J., et al. (1981). Veterans Administration cooperative
study on aphasia: A comparison of individual and group treatment. Journal of Speech and Hearing
Research, 24, 580594.

Wood, L., Lasker, J., Siegel-Causey, E., Beukelman, D. R., et al. (1998) Input framework for
augmentative and alternative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 14(4),
261267.

Focus on Divisions
ASHA specal interest divisions offer their affiliates exclusive e-mail lists and Web forums, the
opportunity to earn CEUs through self-study of peer-reviewed Internet publications, and other
benefits. Special Interest Division 2, Neurophysiology and Neurogenic Speech and Language
Disorders, facilitates the highest level of professional practice provided to individuals with
neurogenic communication disorders, and promotes, interprets, and disseminates information that is
relevant to neurogenic communication disorders. Division 12, Augmentative and Alternative
Communication, promotes continuing education on AAC, advocates for AAC clinical service
needs, and advocates for personnel preparation in the area of AAC.
For more information about the special interest divisions, visit ASHA's Special Interest Divisions
Web site.