Table 1.

Clinical studies

Study	Aims	Patient characteristics & treatment	Treatment duration/intensity & outcome measures	Main results	Conclusions
Pulvermüller et al., 2001	Comparison of intensive CI-based aphasia therapy with non-intensive “standard" aphasia therapy”	Chronic aphasia; CIAT (N=10), standard treatment (N=7)	CI-group: 3 hrs/day, 10 consecutive work-days Control group: standard aphasia therapy, 30 hrs/over ~ 4 weeks AAT, CAL	AAT: CI-group improved on 3/4 subtests; control group 1/4 subtests CAL: Only CI-group improved	Language functions can be improved in chronic stage by highly intensive language training within short period of time The same number of treatment hours spread out over a longer period of time is less effective
Meinzer et al., 2005	Comparison of CIAT and CIATplus; assess stability of treatment gains at 6 months post treatment	Chronic aphasia; CIAT (N=12), CIATplus (N=15)	CIAT and CIATplus: 3 hrs/day, 10 consecutive work-days AAT, CAL, CETI	AAT: Overall language improvement in both groups; gains maintained at 6 months CAL: Increased amount of communication in both groups; improved comprehension increased only in CIATplus CETI: Improvement in functional communication in both groups; gains maintained at 6 months in CIATplus	Language functions can be improved in chronic stage by highly intensive language training within short period of time Some treatment gains are maintained at 6 months post treatment Inclusion of family and friends may be useful in training
Maher et al., 2006	Comparison of CILT and standard treatment at equal intensities; assess stability of treatment gains at 1 month post treatment	Chronic aphasia; CILT (N=4), standard treatment (N=5)	3 hrs/day, 4 days/week for 2 weeks WAB, BNT, ANT, QPA	WAB, BNT, ANT: Overall improvement in both groups; some gains maintained at 1 month in CILT group only QPA: Some improvement in story retell in both groups: some gains maintained at 1 month in both groups	Language functions can be improved in chronic stage by highly intensive language training within short period of time CILT group showed more consistent improvement and maintenance of gains on all outcome measures
Meinzer et al., 2007	Comparison of CIAT administered by therapists and trained laypersons	Chronic aphasia; Therapist group (N=10), layperson group (N=10)	Therapist and layperson groups: 3 hrs/day, 10 consecutive work-days AAT	AAT: Similar overall language improvement in both groups	Language functions can be improved in chronic stage by highly intensive language training within short period of time Treatment administered by trained laypersons is as effective as treatment by therapists
Barthel et al., 2008	Comparison of CIAT and MOAT to determine aspects that contribute to treatment success	Chronic aphasia; CIAT (N=27 from Meinzer et al. 2005), MOAT (N=12)	CIAT and MOAT groups: 3 hrs/day, 10 consecutive work-days AAT, CAL, CETI, picture naming task	AAT: Overall language improvement; gains maintained at 6 months CAL: Increased communication, improved comprehension, improved written production, improved perception of communication; gains maintained at 6 month follow up CETI: Improvement in functional communication; gains maintained at 6 months Picture naming: Generalization to untreated items	Language functions can be improved in chronic stage by highly intensive language training within short period of time using MOAT Treatment gains maintained at 6 months post treatment Consideration of functional deficits, written language production, and everyday communication may be important in rehabilitation of aphasia
Szaflarski et al., 2008	Investigation of modified CIAT approach to address individual semantic, syntactic, and phonologic deficits	Chronic aphasia; N=3	3–4 hrs/day for 5 consecutive days BDAE-3, story retell, mini-CAL	BDAE-3: Improvement in verbal skills and comprehension in 2 patients Story retell: Increase in total number of words and utterances in 2 patients Mini-CAL: No improvement	Language functions can be improved in chronic stage by highly intensive language training within short period of time Modification of CIAT to treat individual deficits in language production may be successful in some cases
Berthier et al., 2009	Comparison of effects of CIAT plus memantine or placebo	Chronic aphasia; N=28	16 weeks drug or placebo; CIAT treatment for 3 hrs/day, 10 consecutive work-days; 2 weeks wash out; 24 weeks open label WAB, CAL	WAB: Improvement in overall language for both groups; significantly greater improvement in memantine group during drug therapy and washout period CAL: Improvement in communication in both groups; significantly better in memantine group	Language functions can be improved in chronic stage by highly intensive language training within short period of time Use of memantine can improve language function in isolation and in conjunction with CIAT Maintenance of treatment gains enhanced with Memantine+CIAT
Faroqi-Shah et al., 2009	Comparison of CILT-O (original) and CILT-G (grammatical)	Chronic, agrammatic aphasia; CILT-O (N=2), CILT-G (N=2)	24 hours over 10 consecutive work-days WAB, BNT, OANB- verb portion), Verb Inflection Test, Cinderella story, informal conversation	WAB, BNT, OANB-verb portion: Improvement on at least one measure of 5 calculated measures by all participants; gains maintained on 4 measures at 3 months Verb Inflection Test: Significant improvement in CILT-G group only; gains maintained at 3 months Cinderella story and informal conversation: Improvement on 4 discourse measures in all participants; gains maintained on 2 discourse measures at 3 months	Language functions can be improved in chronic stage by highly intensive language training within short period of time Grammatical constraints do not significantly impact functional language outcomes Severity and specific aphasic deficits (i.e., agrammatism) may be helpful determining CILT treatment candidacy
Goral & Kempler, 2009	Investigate modified CILT to address verb production sentences and narratives	Chronic, nonfluent aphasia; N=1	ABAB design;1.25 hours/day, 4 days/week for 4 weeks, no treatment 4 weeks (repeat) BDAE, CLQT, personal narratives, Conversation Perception Questionnaire	BDAE: Improvement only on Auditory Comprehension subtests CLQT: No change Personal narratives: Increase in verb production, noun-verb ration, repertoire of verbs Conversation Perception Questionnaire: Significant difference in social communication abilities, perceived as more a more competent communication partner	Language functions can be improved in chronic stage by highly intensive language training within short period of time Modification of CILT to increase verb production was successful
Kirmess & Maher, 2010	Investigate modified CIAT to treat acute stroke aphasia	Acute aphasia (1–2 months post stroke); N=3	3 hours/day, 10 consecutive work-days NGA, TROG-2, VOST, PALPA, Cookie Theft, CILT baseline measures	Overall improvement in language unction on all 5 language measures Improvement on 6 speech production subtests Improvement on receptive language subtests at the sentence level in 2 patients and at the word level in 1 patient	Language functions can be improved in early stages of recovery by highly intensive language training within short period of time Modification of CILT to adapt to acute care environments is reasonable

AAT= Aachen Aphasia Test, CAL= Communication Activity Log, CETI= Communicative Effectiveness Index,WAB= Western Aphasia Battery, BNT= Boston Naming Test, ANT= Action Naming Test, QPA= Quantitative Production Analysis, MOAT= Modified-oriented Aphasia Therapy, BDAE= Boston Diagnostic Aphasia Examination, OANB= Object and Action Naming Battery, CLQT= Cognitive Linguistic Quick Test, NGA= Norwegian Basic Aphasia Assessment, TROG-2= Test for Reception of Grammar 2, VOST= Verb and Sentence Test, PALPA= Psycholinguistic Assessments of Language Processing in Aphasia