4.2 Article

Returning to work with aphasia: A case study

期刊

APHASIOLOGY
卷 25, 期 8, 页码 890-907

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/02687038.2010.549568

关键词

Vocational; Work; Aphasia; Treatment

资金

  1. Tavistock Trust for Aphasia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: For some people with aphasia, returning to work will be their eventual goal. While there are reports in the literature of incidence of return to work, and general discussion of success, there are few documented in depth studies of what this might entail for the individual with aphasia. Aims: This paper explores returning to work with aphasia, and examines the complex relationship between the person, the aphasia and the demands of employment. Methods & Procedures: This is a detailed case report, describing and reflecting on the experiences of GD, who returned to work following his stroke and aphasia. Therapy focused specifically on work requirements is described and the factors affecting GD's return to work explored. An interview was used to elicit GD's reflections on his experiences. Outcome & Results: GD's language skills improved over time and with therapy, and he developed several strategies that facilitated his communication. He was able to return to work (part-time) in a modified role and this was successful initially. After an extended period (similar to 19 months) his employment was terminated and GD explored other options. He moved on to a volunteering and charity trustee role. Conclusions: The success (or not) of returning to work with aphasia is multi-faceted and does not rest solely with the person with aphasia. The nature of the work may have a strong bearing on success, as will the ability and willingness of the employer to engage in the process. Partnership with the person and constant review of goals and management is of overwhelming importance. We need to consider what success may mean in this context and the need to consider therapeutic and rehabilitation needs over a longer time frame.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据