Measuring Real-World Talk Time and Locations of People With Aphasia Using Wearable Technology.

PURPOSE: Measuring real-world communication participation of individuals with aphasia is complicated. Historically, this has been estimated through subjective participant or proxy self-report. To address potential inaccuracies, objective measures such as "talk time" have been proposed. Although promising, technological barriers to collecting and quantifying everyday conversations have been documented (e.g., background noise interference, differentiating recorded speakers, and operating Bluetooth applications). This study explored the use of a novel laryngeal sensor and a Global Positioning System (GPS) tracker with the objective of measuring mean talk time per hour and participant locations across three 8-hr days.

METHOD: Sixteen participants utilized a wearable laryngeal sensor that captures physiological mechano-acoustic signals wirelessly, without recording speech content. The sensor differentiates speech from other laryngeal movements associated with swallowing and coughing. A GPS tracker was also issued to track daily locations. Semistructured interviews regarding feasibility and acceptability were conducted with participants at the end of the data collection period.

RESULTS: Across all participants, laryngeal sensor data were collected for a total of 38 days and GPS data for a total of 43 days, with a mean collection period of 8.21 hr ( SD = 1.38) per day. Mean talk time per hour was 56.46 s ( SD = 35.27). Participants were tracked at a mean of 2.09 locations daily (range: 1-6). Participants reported the devices were relatively comfortable to wear and easy to use.

CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary findings indicated that talk time of individuals with aphasia is limited, though variable. Higher fluency ratings were related to greater mean talk time per hour and locations tracked. Results suggest wearable technology is feasible to use and acceptable to people with aphasia. In the future, wearable devices may offer innovative ways to measure communication participation.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.26237531.