LAUSR

PURPOSE This scoping review examined studies reporting restorative treatments designed to improve auditory comprehension in people with aphasia. METHOD We searched eight databases using keywords aphasia, auditory comprehension, treatment, intervention, and rehabilitation, for studies published between 1970 and 2020. Searches returned 170 records, and after applying exclusionary criteria, 28 articles remained. For each article, two authors independently extracted data on study design parameters, participant characteristics, treatment protocol, and treatment outcomes, including generalization. RESULTS Studies were categorized by treatment focus: direct auditory (n = 7), mixed auditory (n = 13), or indirect (n = 8). Study designs were group (n = 12), single-subject experimental design (n = 11), or case study (n = 5). Fifteen studies had a control condition and/or a control group. Thirteen studies included two to 10 participants. Aphasia severity and auditory comprehension severity were infrequently reported, and most participants were greater than 1-year poststroke. Treatment targets and tasks varied. Sessions ranged from 8 to 240 min, once or more per week, for eight to 60 total sessions over 2-20 weeks. Impairment-based outcome measures were typically used. Improvement and generalization were regularly reported; however, authors frequently did not report statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS A variety of treatments have addressed auditory comprehension deficits in people with aphasia, with many reporting improvements in auditory comprehension for some people. However, the variability in treatment tasks and delivery and outcome measurements preclude confidently offering specific clinical recommendations for implementing auditory comprehension treatments. Gaps identified by the current study may guide the development and exploration of transparent, repeatable, patient-centered treatments. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.21291345.