Validity and features of spontaneous speech in acute aphasia as evaluated with the Brief Aphasia Evaluation: is fluent aphasia more severe than nonfluent aphasia?Purpose To explore the relationship between the two components of spontaneous speech in the Brief Aphasia Evaluation (BAE) and the rest of the scale represented by its three main factors: The Expression, Comprehension, and Complementary factors.
Methods BAE has proven validity and reliability. The evaluation of spontaneous speech in this scale comprises two components: Performance Rank (score: 0-3) and Type of Disorder (Fluency [F], Content [C], or Mixed [FC]) when rank < 3. Sixty-seven patients with left brain damage and 30 demographically matched healthy participants (HP) were studied. It was analyzed the correlation between Performance Rank and the three BAE factors and, recoding 3 as 0 and < 3 as 1, the sensitivity/specificity of this component for each factor. The effect of Type of Disorder on the three factors was analyzed.
Results 1) Performance Rank: Correlations of 0.84 (Expression), 0.81 (Comprehension), and 0.76 (Complementary) were observed, with a sensitivity and specificity ≥ 78% for any factor; 2) Type of Disorder: The performance significantly decreased from FC to C and from C to F in Expression (FC < C < F), from FC to C and from FC to F also in Comprehension and Complementary, from patients with any type of disorder to HP.
Conclusion Performance Rank was a relevant indicator of aphasia by its consistency with valid and comprehensive dimensions of acute language impairments. A degree difference between F and C was observed, being F a milder disorder; i.e., fluency problems were less severe than retrieval or anomia ones.
Keywords
Aphasia; Anomia; Cognition; Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures; Early Diagnosis; Psychology, Applied; Speech Language Pathology; Neuropsychiatry; Neuropsychological Tests; Validity of Tests