This Article Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF) All Versions of this Article: 1545968309348311v1 1545968309348311v2    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Kawohl, W. Articles by Huber, W. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Kawohl, W. Articles by Huber, W. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Semantic Event-Related Potential Components Reflect Severity of Comprehension Deficits in Aphasia

^* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: wolfram.kawohl{at}puk.zh.ch.

	Abstract

Background and objectives. Several cognitive event-related potential (ERP) components such as mismatch negativity, P300, N400, and the late positive component (LPC) have been studied in aphasia. The aim of this study was to determine whether a modified semantic incongruity paradigm can serve as a more graded differentiation of ERP changes in patients with mild versus severe comprehension deficits. Methods. A total of 20 aphasic patients with minor and severe comprehension deficits and 20 young and elder healthy controls were examined while reading 4-word sentences ending in a semantically congruent or noncongruent word. Results. In contrast to young controls and to patients with mild comprehension deficits, aphasic patients with severe comprehension deficits exhibit an early positivity in the time window from 200 to 400 milliseconds and no N400 after the presentation of nonrecurrent semantically incongruent words. Patients with mild comprehension deficits were found to have an N400 with prolonged latency in comparison with the controls. An age effect in the control groups was detected as well. Discussion. Semantic access and integration are performed differently in aphasic subjects with severe comprehension deficits. These differences in lexical–semantic processing must be taken into account in rehabilitation approaches that aim to improve comprehension deficits. Moreover, the findings may contribute to the design of therapy studies by employing a physiological measure that can discriminate among patients at baseline and at the end of an intervention.

First published on October 27, 2009, doi:10.1177/1545968309348311
A more recent version of this article appeared on November 18, 2009


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?