Results
Participants’ demographic
information
The online survey was distributed to 107 Malaysian SLPs who fit the
inclusion criteria. A total of 32 participants completed the survey,
which resulted in a response rate of 29.9%. Participants’ demographic
information is summarized in Table 2.
[Table 2]
Frequency and consistency of aphasia assessment aspects and
activities. The level of frequency and consistency were identified for
the following aspects and activities: (a) documentation of case history
and background information, (b) components of aphasia assessment, (c)
methods of language and communication skills evaluation, and (d)
contexts of aphasia evaluation. Table 3 summarizes the frequency and
consistency levels for each aspect or activity. Practices that were to
be conducted frequently and consistently (rated by more than 80% of the
participants) are:
- Documentation of case history via interview and medical records
- Evaluation of auditory language comprehension and spoken
language/verbal expression
- Evaluation of repetition of words and sentences
- Evaluation of pragmatic and social skills
- Unstructured observation of language and communication functions
- Application of informal assessment approach
- Evaluation of aphasia in clinical settings
[Table 3]
Challenges in aphasia assessment. The challenges were grouped
into three categories, which are barriers related to cultural-linguistic
diversity, limitation of support and resources, and limitation of
clinical competency among SLPs in aphasia evaluation. The proportion for
each challenge as rated by the participants is shown in Table 4. Two
types of challenges were identified to be experiences by more than half
of the participants, which include: (a) language differences between PWA
and clinicians, and (b) lack of standardized tool for aphasia
evaluation.
[Table 4]