The City Gesture Checklist: The development of a novel gesture assessment

The City Gesture Checklist: The development of a novel gesture assessment:

Abstract

Background

People with aphasia rely on gesture more than healthy controls to get their message across, but use a limited range of gesture types. Gesture therapy is thus a potential avenue of intervention for people with aphasia. However, currently no gesture assessment evaluates how they use gesture. Such a tool could inform therapy targets and measure outcomes. In gesture research, many different coding categories are used to describe gesture forms and functions. These coding methods are prohibitively time‐consuming to use in clinical practice. There is therefore a need for a ‘quick and dirty’ method of assessing gesture use.

Aims

To investigate current practice among UK‐based clinicians (speech and language therapists) in relation to gesture assessment and therapy, to synthesize gesture‐coding frameworks used in aphasia research, to develop a gesture checklist based on the synthesized coding frameworks suitable for use in clinical practice, and to investigate the interrater reliability (IRR) of the checklist among experienced and unfamiliar users.

Methods & Procedures

The research team synthesized seven gesture‐coding frameworks and trialled three resulting prototype checklists at a co‐design workshop with 20 clinicians. Attending clinicians were also consulted about their current clinical gesture practice using a questionnaire. A final City Gesture Checklist (CGC) was developed based upon outcomes and feedback from the workshop. The IRR of the CGC was evaluated between the research team and 11 further clinicians within a second workshop. Both groups used the CGC to count gestures in video clips of people with aphasia talking to a conversation partner.

Main Contribution

A total of 18 workshop attendees completed the current practice questionnaire. Of these, 10 reported assessing gesture informally and five also used formal assessment. Gesture‐coding synthesis highlighted six main categories of gesture form. Clinicians at the co‐design workshop provided feedback on prototype checklists regarding the relevance and usability of the gesture categories, layout, use of images and instructions. A final version of the CGC was created incorporating their recommendations. The IRR for the CGC was moderate between both the researchers and clinicians.

Conclusions & Implications

The CGC can be used to assess the types of gesture that people with aphasia produce. The IRR was moderate amongst both experienced users and new users who had received no training. Future research directions include investigating how to improve IRR, evaluating intra‐rater reliability and sensitivity to change, and exploring use of the CGC in clinical practice.

What this paper adds

What is already known on the subject

People with aphasia rely on gesture more than healthy speakers, yet use a more limited range of gesture types. Gesture therapy is used by clinicians with the aim of helping people with aphasia to compensate for their language impairment and/or to facilitate speech.

What this paper adds to existing knowledge

This study explores current gesture assessment practice among UK‐based clinicians and synthesizes the coding categories used in the literature about gesture research in aphasia. It describes the development of a novel outcome measure, the CGC, and preliminary testing of its IRR.

What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?

This ‘quick and dirty’ tool enables clinicians to analyse and record the types of gesture produced by people with aphasia without the need for gesture coding. Preliminary findings suggest that clinicians can use it with a fair degree of reliability by following the checklist's written instructions.