This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
Abstract
Objective To determine the contributions of apraxia of speech (AOS) and anomia to conversational dysfluency.
Methods In this observational study of 52 patients with chronic aphasia, 47 with concomitant AOS, fluency was quantified using correct information units per minute (CIUs/min) from propositional speech tasks. Videos of patients performing conversational, how-to and picture-description tasks, word and sentence repetition, and diadochokinetic tasks were used to diagnose AOS using the Apraxia of Speech Rating Scale (ASRS). Anomia was quantified by patients' scores on the 30 even-numbered items from the Boston Naming Test (BNT).
Results Together, ASRS and BNT scores accounted for 51.4% of the total variance in CIUs/min; the ASRS score accounted for the majority of that variance. The BNT score was associated with lesions in the left superior temporal gyrus, left inferior frontal gyrus, and large parts of the insula. The global ASRS score was associated with lesions in the left dorsal arcuate fasciculus (AF), pre- and post-central gyri, and both banks of the central sulcus of the insula. The ASRS score for the primary distinguishing features of AOS (no overlap with features of aphasia) was associated with less AF and more insular involvement. Only ∼27% of this apraxia-specific lesion overlapped with lesions associated with the BNT score. Lesions associated with AOS had minimal overlap with the frontal aslant tract (FAT) (<1%) or the extreme capsule fiber tract (1.4%). Finally, ASRS scores correlated significantly with damage to the insula but not to the AF, extreme capsule, or FAT.
Conclusions Results are consistent with previous findings identifying lesions of the insula and AF in patients with AOS, damage to both of which may create dysfluency in patients with aphasia.
Footnotes
Funding information and disclosures are provided at the end of the article. Full disclosure form information provided by the authors is available with the full text of this article at Neurology.org/cp.
↵* These authors contributed equally to the manuscript.
- Received March 21, 2019.
- Accepted May 29, 2019.
- © 2019 American Academy of Neurology
AAN Members
We have changed the login procedure to improve access between AAN.com and the Neurology journals. If you are experiencing issues, please log out of AAN.com and clear history and cookies. (For instructions by browser, please click the instruction pages below). After clearing, choose preferred Journal and select login for AAN Members. You will be redirected to a login page where you can log in with your AAN ID number and password. When you are returned to the Journal, your name should appear at the top right of the page.
AAN Non-Member Subscribers
Purchase access
The Nerve!: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
If you are uploading a letter concerning an article:
You must have updated your disclosures within six months: http://submit.neurology.org
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.