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:
  1. Documentation of case history via interview and medical records
  2. Evaluation of auditory language comprehension and spoken language/verbal expression
  3. Evaluation of repetition of words and sentences
  4. Evaluation of pragmatic and social skills
  5. Unstructured observation of language and communication functions
  6. Application of informal assessment approach
  7. 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]