Primary objective: To review the current literature on interventions for dysarthria following traumatic brain injury (TBI) for their effectiveness and methodological quality, and identify future directions for research in developing guidelines for treating dysarthria in this population.Research design: Scoping review.Methods and procedures: Electronic databases were searched up until July 2018 to find intervention trials for treating dysarthria following TBI. Articles were assessed by three reviewers to meet the following criteria: (1) population (adults with dysarthria following TBI only) and (2) intervention studies. Of the 1481 articles initially identified, 17 were selected based on inclusion criteria. 16 articles were single case designs (SCD) and one was a cohort study. Methodological qualities of eligible articles were examined using the single-case experimental design (SCED) rating scale; the cohort study was qualitatively described.Main outcomes and results: The interventions described fell into six broad categories - behavioral, prosthetic, instrumental, pharmacological, augmentative and alternative communication (AAC), and mixed intervention. Behavioral interventions received the most focus in the literature. The articles rated using the SCED received an average score of 6.8, indicating moderate methodological quality.Conclusions: This field currently lacks high-quality research. Further research is required to determine the best clinical practice.

中文翻译：

---

创伤性脑损伤后构音障碍成人干预措施的范围审查。

主要目标：回顾当前关于创伤性脑损伤 (TBI) 后构音障碍干预措施的有效性和方法学质量的文献，并确定未来研究制定该人群构音障碍治疗指南的方向。研究设计：范围审查。方法和方法程序：搜索电子数据库直至 2018 年 7 月，以寻找治疗 TBI 后构音障碍的干预试验。文章由三位评审员评估以满足以下标准：（1）人群（仅在 TBI 后出现构音障碍的成人）和（2）干预研究。在最初确定的 1481 篇文章中，根据纳入标准选择了 17 篇。16 篇文章是单例设计 (SCD)，一篇是队列研究。使用单例实验设计 (SCED) 评分量表检查合格文章的方法学质量；队列研究进行了定性描述。主要结果和结果：所描述的干预分为六大类 - 行为、假肢、工具、药理学、辅助和替代交流 (AAC) 以及混合干预。行为干预在文献中最受关注。使用 SCED 评分的文章平均得分为 6.8，表明方法学质量中等。结论：该领域目前缺乏高质量的研究。需要进一步研究以确定最佳临床实践。所描述的干预措施分为六大类 - 行为、假肢、工具、药理学、辅助和替代交流 (AAC) 以及混合干预。行为干预在文献中最受关注。使用 SCED 评分的文章平均得分为 6.8，表明方法学质量中等。结论：该领域目前缺乏高质量的研究。需要进一步研究以确定最佳临床实践。所描述的干预措施分为六大类 - 行为、假肢、工具、药理学、辅助和替代交流 (AAC) 以及混合干预。行为干预在文献中最受关注。使用 SCED 评分的文章平均得分为 6.8，表明方法学质量中等。结论：该领域目前缺乏高质量的研究。需要进一步研究以确定最佳临床实践。该领域目前缺乏高质量的研究。需要进一步研究以确定最佳临床实践。该领域目前缺乏高质量的研究。需要进一步研究以确定最佳临床实践。