Speech therapy after a stroke: aphasia, dysarthria and swallowing
Three different problems get grouped under one word, and they recover differently. What the evidence says about therapy intensity, and what families most often get wrong about aphasia.
Blog · · 702 words
Speech therapy after a stroke addresses three separate problems that get collapsed into one word. Aphasia is difficulty with language itself, finding words or understanding them. Dysarthria is difficulty producing speech clearly when the language is intact. Dysphagia is difficulty swallowing, and it is the one that is medically dangerous. They recover on different timelines and the treatments have little in common.
Key facts, with sources
- Roughly 25% to 50% of strokes result in aphasia. [1]
- Aphasia after a first ischaemic stroke affects around 15% of people under 65, rising to about 43% of those aged 85 and over. [2]
- Speech and language therapy improves functional communication, reading, writing and expressive language compared with no therapy; higher intensity is associated with better outcomes, though with higher dropout. [1]
Aphasia is not a loss of intelligence
This is the most important sentence in the article for families to read.
A person with aphasia knows what they want to say. The route from the thought to the word is damaged; the thought is not. Comprehension may also be affected, which makes it look from outside like confusion, and it is not.
Speaking to an adult with aphasia as though they are a child is common, well-intentioned and demoralising. What helps: slow down, give considerably longer to respond than feels natural, ask one question at a time, and accept gesture, writing or drawing as answers. What does not help: simplifying the content, finishing their sentences, or asking a companion instead.
Roughly a quarter to half of strokes result in aphasia, and the proportion rises sharply with age, from around 15% under 65 to about 43% at 85 and over.
Dysarthria is a motor problem, not a language one
The muscles of speech are weak, slow or poorly coordinated. The words chosen are exactly right; the delivery is slurred, quiet, breathy or effortful.
It is treated like any other motor problem: targeted exercise for the muscles involved, plus compensatory strategies for rate, volume and phrasing, practised at the intensity where speech is still intelligible and then pushed.
The distinction matters practically. Someone with dysarthria can usually write what they cannot say. Someone with aphasia often cannot, and offering them a notepad is not the help it appears to be.
Swallowing is the one that is dangerous
Dysphagia produces no obvious deficit in conversation, which is exactly why it is underestimated. It is the one that leads to aspiration pneumonia.
Assessment establishes which food textures and liquid consistencies are safe and which strategies, positioning, smaller volumes, specific swallow techniques, reduce the risk. This part of speech therapy is medical rather than communicative, and it is frequently the actual reason a referral was made.
It is also the reason speech therapy usually gets involved earlier than families expect, sometimes before anyone has thought about conversation.
What the evidence says about how much therapy
Speech and language therapy improves functional communication, reading, writing and expressive language compared with no therapy. That much is well established.
On intensity, the picture is more nuanced and worth stating honestly: higher intensity therapy is associated with better functional communication and less severe aphasia, but the trials also show significantly more people withdrew from or declined to continue with intensive schedules. So the benefit is real and it is partly confounded by who can tolerate it.
The practical reading is that more is generally better if it is sustainable, and a schedule someone abandons in week three is worse than a lighter one they complete. That is a conversation to have at the start, not in week three.
What progress actually looks like
Uneven. Recovery is fastest in the early months and continues well beyond the point at which people are often told to expect a plateau, particularly where practice continues between sessions.
Practice between sessions is most of the work. That is one concrete argument for therapy delivered at home: the practice ends up where the actual conversations are, with the people they are with, rather than in a room the person visits twice a week.
Questions people ask about this
How soon should speech therapy start after a stroke?
As soon as the medical team clears it. Swallowing is usually assessed first because it is the safety issue, often before communication work begins.
Is speech therapy covered by insurance?
Commonly, including Medicare and Medicaid, where there is a documented deficit. We verify benefits before the first visit.
Can it be done at home?
Yes. Our team provides speech therapy at home across the Phoenix metro, which also puts the between-session practice where the family conversations happen.
Is more therapy always better?
More is generally better when it is sustainable. Trials of intensive schedules show better outcomes alongside higher dropout, so the right intensity is the highest one the person will actually complete.
What should family members do differently?
Slow down, allow much longer for a response than feels comfortable, ask one question at a time, and accept gesture or writing. Do not simplify the content or speak to a companion instead.
Read next
Sources
- [1] ASHA Practice Portal, Aphasia
- [2] Epidemiology of Aphasia Attributable to First Ischemic Stroke (Stroke, AHA)
This article is general information, not medical advice for your situation. Published evidence is described as published evidence; we make no claim about outcomes at this practice.
Talk it through with a therapist
No charge for a question. We would rather tell you physical therapy is not the answer than book you in.
Call (602) 439-3800 Request an appointment