Recovering minimum communication circuits
Criteria of analysis and implementation
ICRA-R Battery components follow the same analysis criterion of linguistic-pragmatic variables that were applied in designing ICRA-A Battery instruments. For their clinical implementation the same MINIMUM CONDITIONS related to the assessment context are considered: spatial organization, assessment time, the participation of a relative, friend and/or caregiver. It is also supported by the “format” concept and sabotage strategies are used for their implementation.
The results obtained lead to an analysis of whether it is necessary to strengthen or recover paralinguistic and linguistic components and/or coherence of the eight basic speech acts assessed with ICRA-R Battery.
The therapeutic approach seeks to help these patients recover minimum communication by showing their communicative intent by means of economical nonverbal and verbal production, both from the phonologic and the lexical-semantic points of view, with high communicative impact. From then on, effective basic communication starts to be restored, improving the quality of daily life of the patient and his/her closest circle.
Criteria of analysis and implementation
The patient’s pre-morbid and morbid characteristics and his/her communicative close circle of affection will determine to what extent his/her performance can be improved. In view of this, different degrees of progress can be expected when implementing the therapeutic approach based on the ICRA-R.
1) Recover only the paralinguistic production of the eight basic speech acts or of some of them.
2) Recover some of these acts; the simplest among the eight acts assessed. For example: rejecting, asserting and requesting (an object).
3) Recover the eight basic speech acts with their linguistic and paralinguistic production.
4) Recover the eight basic speech acts and, from this, activate changes in the MINIMUM COMMUNICATION CIRCUIT, thus reaching speech recovery.
Both assessment and treatment are carried out jointly with the people who interact with the patient on a daily basis, especially with whom we call the INTERACTION ROLE MODEL, that is, the person identified by the evaluator as the one who has built an affective communication channel with the patient. No tie, in and of itself, places any relative, friend or caregiver in such a role.