Children with developmental disabilities who have complex communication needs (CCN) frequently need to use augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) to communicate effectively and efficientl...

Language processing impairments across different dimensions result in deficits of informational content, syntactic complexity, and morphological well-formedness of sentences produced by people with aphasia (PWA). Deficits in language processing affect linguistic skills of bi/multilingual PWA in all languages that they have acquired prior to aphasia. However, the impairments of dual or multiple languages in aphasia may not necessarily be parallel. One language may be more preserved than another and be recovered at different paces, including sentence production abilities. This scoping review aims to compare syntactic characteristics and errors demonstrated by bi/multilingual PWAs between their acquired languages and to explore the nature of bilingual impairments in primary progressive aphasia (PPA). We conducted an online search on three databases (MEDLINE, SciVerse Scopus, and Taylor and Francis publications) for original studies on sentence production of bi/multilingual aphasia that were published between 1991 and 2021 using keywords related to “bilingualism”, “aphasia”, and “speech production”. Based on the titles, abstracts, and full-text screenings, 13 studies were found to have met our inclusion criteria. A qualitative synthesis of the accumulated evidence was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. Collectively, past researchers reported dominance in L1 with higher occurrences of linguistic errors in L2 among participants with sudden onset aphasia. In PPA, language impairments were found to be comparable between L1 and L2, which may indicate parallel deterioration. It is noted that this review is not exhaustive and many of the reviewed studies were based on single case studies. This review also highlighted an urgent need for investigation into multilingual PPA to fully comprehend the nature of sentence production impairment.

Purpose: This study compared the satisfaction of recipients of conventional speech-language therapy (C-SLT), speech-language teletherapy (SLTT), and hybrid speech-language therapy (H-SLT), and determined sociodemographic factors that affect their satisfaction. Patients and Methods: Participants were clients and caregivers of a speech-language clinic at a public university. Services were primarily provided by student clinicians, who were undergoing supervised clinical training. An online survey was distributed, which consisted of three sections: Background Information, Overall Satisfaction in SLT, and Satisfaction in SLTT. All participants completed the first two sections, while the third section was completed only by those who experienced SLTT or H-SLT. Results: Most of the respondents were caregivers (89.7%), female (79.4%), of Malay ethnicity (80.9%), have received tertiary education (77.9%), within the low-income category (66.2%), held a job (76.5%), and resided in central West Malaysia (83.8%). Many participants experienced C-SLT (51%), followed by H-SLT (34%), and SLTT (15%). There were no significant differences in the overall satisfaction of the participants across three modes of services delivery (F[2,67] = 0.02, p = 0.95), and in the satisfaction with teletherapy between the H-SLT and SLTT groups (t = 0.90, p = 0.38). Income was the only sociodemographic factor that was correlated with the satisfaction level in teletherapy (r = 0.37, p = 0.04).

Rehabilitation and the speech-language therapy profession are advancing in Malaysia, yet access to community-based rehabilitation services and self-management support for aphasia and cognitive communication disability remains unclear. This review aimed to explore the availability and accessibility of community-based rehabilitation services and self-management support for people with aphasia and cognitive communication disability in Malaysia, while also investigating the sociocultural factors influencing access. A scoping review was conducted following Arksey and O'Malley and the Joanna Briggs Institute frameworks. Structured Google searches and targeted website searches followed Godin et al. Eleven scholarly texts were included. No scholarly texts addressed cognitive communication disability or included perspectives from people with lived experience. Google searches identified 19 organisations offering aphasia or cognitive communication rehabilitation services, and one aphasia support group in Malaysia. Factors influencing access include Malaysia's multilingualism, limited speech-language therapists, lack of specialisation in aphasiology, financial constraints, and positive attitudes towards technology-based interventions. Rehabilitation services and self-management support for people with aphasia and cognitive communication disability in Malaysia are geographically inequitable. There is an urgent need for further research to support the development of community-based rehabilitation and self-management support for aphasia and cognitive communication disability in Malaysia.