- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT04575909
Functional Connectivity and Predictors of Affective Aprosodia Intervention in Subacute Right Hemisphere Stroke
Study Overview
Status
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
The phrase, "it's not what you say, but how you say it" neatly sums up prosody - the changes to one's tone of voice that transmit meaning. Changes to speech rate, rhythm, volume, and pitch to convey emotion fall into the category of affective, or emotional, prosody. That is, the changes made to the voice to express feelings, such as happy or sad.
Following damage to the right side of the brain, such as in stroke, difficulties in affective prosody understanding and use have been observed. These findings have led researchers to view the right hemisphere as playing a critical role for emotional prosody. Affective prosody difficulties do not always spontaneously improve after acute right hemisphere stroke, and only a few evidenced-based treatments are available for these individuals. It is also understood that affective prosody difficulties can negatively impact social interactions and relationships, including those who care for individuals with emotional prosody difficulties. With miscommunication frequently occurring between those living with affective prosody disorders and those with whom these people interact, the risk of reduced quality of life and social isolation is possible and could be related to poorer health outcomes. Not only might there be personal burdens associated with poor management of communication difficulties in right hemisphere stroke and dementia, but there might also be economic burdens as well. In addition to counseling caregivers, family, and friends about the communication changes of loved ones, more evidenced-based speech and language treatment options are needed for those living with affective prosody disorders.
Cognitive-Linguistic and Speech-Language Assessment: During baseline testing, detailed speech-language and cognitive-communication behavioral testing will occur, focusing on aprosodia, awareness, motor speech, attention, verbal working memory, executive function, discourse, social participation, and emotion. Detailed testing focusing on aprosodia will occur after each Intervention Phase.
Functional near-infrared spectroscopy: Resting state functional connectivity as measured via functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) will be assessed at Baseline, Post Phase I, and Post Phase II testing time points to track longitudinal change in functional connectivity patterns associated with targeted aprosodia intervention.
Aprosodia Intervention Phase: The aprosodia intervention will target receptive and expressive prosody over the course of four (4) weeks (12 sessions total). The receptive prosody intervention phase will occur for two weeks (6 sessions total, 3 sessions/week), and the expressive prosody intervention phase will occur for two weeks (6 sessions total, 3 sessions/week). Within each phase, the types of cues participants receive will also vary. Half of the expressive prosody intervention phase will use explicit cues (3 sessions total, 1 week), and the other half of the expressive prosody intervention phase will use implicit cues (3 sessions total, 1 week). This same setup for expressive prosody intervention phase will be used in the receptive prosody intervention phase. In addition to these implicit and explicit cues, expressive prosody intervention will also include feedback to increase awareness.
No-Intervention Phase: Participants will meet study personnel with the same frequency and duration (3 sessions/week, ~1 hour/session) during the No-Intervention Phase as during REACT. Sessions will comprise conversation about current events, recovery progress (including speech therapy goals targeted in outside intervention [if relevant]), hobbies, and other similar topics.
Study Type
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
Maryland
-
Baltimore, Maryland, United States, 21287
- Johns Hopkins School of Medicine
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Ischemic stroke to the right cerebral hemisphere
- No history of other significant neurological disease or injury affecting the brain (excluding prior lacunar stroke, asymptomatic stroke, or TIA)
- Proficient speaker of English prior to stroke per self-report
- Capable of providing informed consent or indicating another to provide informed consent
- Ages 18-89
- Demonstration of receptive and/or expressive aprosodia on standardized measures of aprosodia
- Does not have severe cognitive impairment (MoCA > 9)
- Is not severely depressed (PHQ-9 < 20)
- Does not have more than mild motor speech impairment (ASRS < 16 and Dysarthria severity < 3)
- Normal or corrected-to-normal hearing and vision via screening tasks and self-report
- Medically stable
- Not taking any medications that may interfere with prosody processing
- Participation in speech therapy not targeting aprosodia
Exclusion Criteria:
- Ischemic stroke outside the right hemisphere or primary hemorrhagic stroke in the right hemisphere
- History of symptomatic stroke or significant neurological disease or injury affecting the brain
- No proficiency in English based on self-report
- Unable to provide informed consent or to indicate another to provide informed consent
- Children < 18 and adults 90+ years
- No demonstration of expressive or receptive aprosodia
- Severe cognitive-linguistic impairment (MoCA < 16)
- Severe depression (PHQ-9 > 19)
- More than mild motor speech impairment (ASRS > 15 + Dysarthria severity < 2)
- Uncorrected hearing/vision loss via screening tasks and self-report
- Not medically stable
- Reported medication use that may interfere with prosody processing
- Participating in outside speech therapy targeting aprosodia
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Crossover Assignment
- Masking: Single
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: Explicit Expressive Prosody Intervention
Explicit cues will be provided to help participants improve expression of targeted affective prosody.
|
Intervention will focus on improving participants' use and understanding of emotional prosody using implicit and explicit cues, biofeedback, modeling, and feedback.
|
|
Experimental: Implicit Expressive Prosody Intervention
Implicit cues will be provided to help participants improve expression of targeted affective prosody.
|
Intervention will focus on improving participants' use and understanding of emotional prosody using implicit and explicit cues, biofeedback, modeling, and feedback.
|
|
Experimental: Explicit Receptive Prosody Intervention
Explicit cues will be provided to help participants improve recognition of targeted affective prosody.
|
Intervention will focus on improving participants' use and understanding of emotional prosody using implicit and explicit cues, biofeedback, modeling, and feedback.
|
|
Experimental: Implicit Receptive Prosody Intervention
Implicit cues will be provided to help participants improve recognition of targeted affective prosody.
|
Intervention will focus on improving participants' use and understanding of emotional prosody using implicit and explicit cues, biofeedback, modeling, and feedback.
|
|
Active Comparator: No-Intervention
Sessions will comprise conversation about current events, recovery progress (including speech therapy goals targeted in outside intervention [if relevant]), hobbies, and other similar topics.
|
Sessions will comprise conversation about current events, recovery progress (including speech therapy goals targeted in outside intervention [if relevant]), hobbies, and other similar topics.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Change in accuracy on affective prosody expression following aprosodia intervention compared to spontaneous recovery
Time Frame: Baseline, 1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention
|
Change in accuracy of participants' ability to express affective prosody on sentence lists (list score range 0-45), with increasing accuracy indicating better outcome.
|
Baseline, 1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention
|
|
Change in accuracy on affective prosody recognition following aprosodia intervention compared to spontaneous recovery
Time Frame: Baseline, 1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention
|
Change in accuracy of participants' ability to express affective prosody on sentence lists (list score range 0-45), with increasing accuracy indicating better outcome.
|
Baseline, 1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention
|
|
Change in accuracy on standardized contextual measures of affective prosody expression
Time Frame: Baseline, 1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention
|
Change in accuracy on the Montreal Evaluation of Communication (score range 0-18), with increasing score indicating better outcome.
|
Baseline, 1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention
|
|
Change in accuracy on standardized contextualized measures of affective prosody recognition
Time Frame: 1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention
|
Change in accuracy on The Awareness of Social Inference Test (score range 0-24, with increasing score indicating better outcome.
|
1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention
|
|
Change in resting state functional connectivity
Time Frame: Baseline, 1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention
|
Differences in resting state functional connectivity patterns within prosody-specific regions of interest and left homologues (connectivity association range 0-0.99), with increasing association values indicating stronger connectivity
|
Baseline, 1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention
|
|
Behavioral and neurological predictors of aprosodia intervention outcomes
Time Frame: Baseline, 1 week after Phase I or Phase II Intervention
|
Scores on baseline cognitive-linguistic assessments and percent damage to lesioned regions of interest, larger beta coefficients indicating a stronger relationship between predictor (baseline behavioral and neurological data) and predicted (prosody accuracy) variables.
|
Baseline, 1 week after Phase I or Phase II Intervention
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Change in standardized acoustic features (rate, frequency, intensity, rhythm), on standardized measures of prosody expression
Time Frame: Baseline, 1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention
|
Change in z-scored acoustic features on the Montreal Evaluation of Communication expression subtest, with scores closer to zero indicating better outcome.
|
Baseline, 1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention
|
Other Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Change in accuracy on standardized measures of affective prosody expression
Time Frame: Baseline, 1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention, 4 weeks after Phase II Intervention
|
Change in accuracy on the Montreal Evaluation of Communication (score range 0-18), with increasing score indicating better outcome.
|
Baseline, 1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention, 4 weeks after Phase II Intervention
|
|
Change in accuracy on standardized measures of affective prosody recognition
Time Frame: Baseline, 1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention, 4 weeks after Phase II Intervention
|
Change in accuracy on the Montreal Evaluation of Communication (score range 0-12) and The Awareness of Social Inference Test (score range 0-24, with increasing score indicating better outcome.
|
Baseline, 1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention, 4 weeks after Phase II Intervention
|
|
Change in accuracy on affective prosody expression
Time Frame: Baseline, 1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention, 4 weeks after Phase II Intervention
|
Change in accuracy of participants' ability to express affective prosody on sentence lists (list score range 0-45), with increasing accuracy indicating better outcome.
|
Baseline, 1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention, 4 weeks after Phase II Intervention
|
|
Change in accuracy on affective prosody recognition
Time Frame: Baseline, 1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention, 4 weeks after Phase II Intervention
|
Change in accuracy of participants' ability to recognize affective prosody on sentence lists (list score range 0-45), with increasing accuracy indicating better outcome.
|
Baseline, 1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention, 4 weeks after Phase II Intervention
|
|
Change in report of social participation
Time Frame: Baseline, 1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention, 4 weeks after Phase II Intervention
|
Change in social participation as measure on the Sydney Psychosocial Reintegration Scale Version 2 (score range 0-48), with increasing score indicating worse outcome.
|
Baseline, 1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention, 4 weeks after Phase II Intervention
|
|
Change in resting state functional connectivity
Time Frame: Baseline, 1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention, 4 weeks after Phase II Intervention
|
Differences in resting state functional connectivity patterns within prosody-specific regions of interest and left homologues (connectivity association range 0-0.99), with increasing association values indicating stronger connectivity
|
Baseline, 1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention, 4 weeks after Phase II Intervention
|
|
Change in standardized acoustic features (rate, frequency, intensity, rhythm), on standardized measures of prosody expression
Time Frame: Baseline, 1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention, 4 weeks after Phase II Intervention
|
Change in z-scored acoustic features on the MEC-expression subtest, with scores closer to zero indicating better outcome.
|
Baseline, 1 week after Phase I Intervention, 1 week after Phase II Intervention, 4 weeks after Phase II Intervention
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Argye E Hillis, MD, MA, Johns Hopkins University
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Primary Completion (Actual)
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
- IRB00264439
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.
Clinical Trials on Right Hemispheric Stroke
-
IRCCS San Camillo, Venezia, ItalyActive, not recruitingHealthy | Traumatic Brain Injury | Mild Cognitive Impairment | Right Hemispheric Stroke | Left Hemispheric Stroke | Right Hemispheric Brain Tumor | Left Hemispheric Brain TumorItaly
-
University of NeuchatelCompletedBrain Injuries, Traumatic | Right Hemispheric StrokeSwitzerland
-
Gazi UniversityCompletedHemiplegia | Anosognosia | Right Hemispheric Stroke | Hemispatial NeglectTurkey
-
Fuzhou Neurodawn Rongkang Pharmaceutical Co., LtdNot yet recruitingAcute Ischemic Stroke | Transcranial Bone Marrow Injection | RK-4 | Acute Large Hemispheric Infarction Stroke
-
Neurodawn Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.Fuzhou Neurodawn Rongkang Pharmaceutical Co., LtdNot yet recruitingAcute Ischemic Stroke | Transcranial Bone Marrow Injection | RK-4 | Acute Large Hemispheric InfarctionChina
-
Association APPROCHESociété Neuradom; IMT Atlantique BrestRecruitingIschemic Stroke | Hemorrhagic Unilateral Cortico-subcortical Hemispheric StrokeFrance
-
Tufts Medical CenterCompletedRight Ventricular Dysfunction | Stroke Volume Index | Longitudinal Heart StrainUnited States
-
Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de ParisRecruiting
-
VA Office of Research and DevelopmentRecruitingSpatial Neglect After Right Brain StrokeUnited States
-
Mayo ClinicTerminatedNon-traumatic Hemispheric Brain LesionsUnited States
Clinical Trials on Aprosodia Intervention
-
Biolux Research Holdings, Inc.TerminatedOrthodontic Tooth MovementCanada
-
Nottingham Trent UniversityUnknownOverweight and ObesityUnited Kingdom
-
University of California, San FranciscoNational Cancer Institute (NCI)CompletedColorectal Carcinoma | Healthy Subject | Health Status UnknownUnited States
-
University of Southern DenmarkTrygFonden, DenmarkUnknownObesity | Overweight | Metabolic Syndrome | ChildrenDenmark
-
University of FloridaCompletedSensitivityUnited States
-
Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer CenterCompleted
-
Mayo ClinicNational Cancer Institute (NCI)WithdrawnCancer Survivor | Peripheral Sensory Neuropathy
-
Roswell Park Cancer InstituteNational Cancer Institute (NCI)CompletedStage 0a Bladder Cancer AJCC v8 | Stage 0is Bladder Cancer AJCC v8 | Stage I Bladder Cancer AJCC v8United States
-
Vanderbilt UniversityCompletedMath Learning Disability | Reading Learning DisabilityUnited States
-
Universidad de ExtremaduraDiputación Provincial de BadajozRecruitingHealth Education | Gamification in Health EducationSpain