Treatment is usually carried out by speech and language therapists/pathologists, who use a wide range of techniques to stimulate language learning. In the past, there was a vogue for drilling children in grammatical exercises, using imitation and elicitation, but such methods fell into disuse when it became apparent that there was little generalisation to everyday situations. Contemporary approaches to enhancing development of language structure, for younger children at least, are more likely to adopt 'milieu' methods, in which the intervention is interwoven into natural episodes of communication, and the therapist builds on the child's utterances, rather than dictating what will be talked about. Interventions for older children, may be more explicit, telling the children what areas are being targeted and giving explanations regarding the rules and structures they are learning, often with visual supports.

In addition, there has been a move away from a focus solely on grammar and phonology toward interventions that develop children's social use of language, often working in small groups that may include typically developing as well as language-impaired peers.

Another way in contemporary remediation differ from the past is that parents are more likely to be directly involved, but this approach is largely used with preschool children, rather than those whose problems persist into school age.,

For school-aged children, teachers are increasingly involved in intervention, either in collaboration with speech and language therapists/pathologists, or as the main agents of delivery of the intervention. Evidence for the benefits of a collaborative approach is emerging, but the benefits of asking education staff to be the main deliverers of SLT intervention (the “consultative” approach) are unclear. When SLT intervention is delivered indirectly by trained SLT assistants, however, there are indications that this can be effective.

A radically different approach has been developed by Tallal and colleagues, who devised a computer-based intervention, FastForWord, that involves prolonged and intensive training on specific components of language and auditory processing. The theory underlying FastForword maintains that language difficulties are caused by a failure to make fine-grained auditory discriminations in the temporal dimension, and the computerised training materials are designed to sharpen perceptual acuity. However, a systematic review of clinical trials assessing FastForWord reported no significant gains relative to a control group.

In this field, Randomized controlled trial methodology has not been widely used, and this makes it difficult to assess clinical efficacy with confidence. Children's language will tend to improve over time, and without controlled studies, it can be hard to know how much of observed change is down to a specific treatment. There is, however, increasing evidence that direct 1:1 intervention with an SLT/P can be effective for improving vocabulary and expressive language. There have been few studies of interventions that target receptive language, though some positive outcomes have been reported.,

After the initial diagnosis of speech delay, a hearing test will be administered to ensure that hearing loss or deafness is not an underlying cause of the delay. If a child has successfully completed the hearing test, the therapy or therapies used will be determined. There are many therapies available for children that have been diagnosed with a speech delay, and for every child, the treatment and therapies needed vary with the degree, severity, and cause of the delay. While speech therapy is the most common form of intervention, many children may benefit from additional help from occupational and physical therapies as well. Physical and occupational therapies can be used for a child that is suffering from speech delay due to physical malformations and children that have also been diagnosed with a developmental delay such as autism or a language processing delay. Children that have been identified with hearing loss can be taught simple sign language to build and improve their vocabulary in addition to attending speech therapy.

The parents of a delayed child are the first and most important tool in helping overcome the speech delay. The parent or caregiver of the child can provide the following activities at home, in addition to the techniques suggested by a speech therapist, to positively influence the growth of speech and vocabulary:

- Reading to the child regularly

- Use of questions and simple, clear language

- Positive reinforcement in addition to patience

For children that are suffering from physical disorder that is causing difficulty forming and pronouncing words, parents and caregivers suggest using and introducing different food textures to exercise and build jaw muscles while promoting new movements of the jaw while chewing. Another less studied technique used to combat and treat speech delay is a form of therapy using music to promote and facilitate speech and language development. It is important to understand that music therapy is in its infancy and has yet to be thoroughly studied and practiced on children suffering from speech delays and impediments.

Special education classes are the primary treatment. These classes focus on activities that sustain growth in language skills. The foundation of this treatment is repetition of oral, reading and writing activities. Usually the SLP, psychologist and the teacher work together with the children in small groups in the class room.

Another treatment is looking at a child's needs through the Individual Education Plan (IEP). In this program teachers and parents work together to monitor the progress of the child's comprehensive, verbal, written, social, and motor skills in school and in the home. Then the child goes through different assessments to determine his/her level. The level that the child is placed in will determine the class size, number of teachers, and the need for therapy.

Children who demonstrate deficiencies early in their speech and language development are at risk for continued speech and language issues throughout later childhood. Similarly, even if these speech and language problems have been resolved, children with early language delay are more at risk for difficulties in phonological awareness, reading, and writing throughout their lives. Children with mixed receptive-expressive language disorder are often likely to have long-term implications for language development, literacy, behavior, social development, and even mental health problems. If suspected of having a mixed receptive-expressive language disorder, treatment is available from a speech therapist or pathologist. Most treatments are short term, and rely upon accommodations made within the environment, in order to minimize interfering with work or school. Programs that involve intervention planning that link verbal short term memory with visual/non-verbal information may be helpful for these children. In addition, approaches such as parent training for language stimulation and monitoring language through the "watch and see" method are recommended. The watch-and-see technique advises children with mixed receptive-expressive language disorder who come from stable, middle-class homes without any other behavioral, medical, or hearing problems should be vigilantly monitored rather than receive intervention. It is often the case that children do not meet the eligibility criteria established through a comprehensive oral language evaluation; and as a result, are not best suited for early intervention programs and require a different approach besides the "one size fits all" model.

In addition to active speech therapy, pharmaceuticals have also been considered as a useful treatment for expressive aphasia. This area of study is relatively new and much research continues to be conducted.

The following drugs have been suggested for use in treating aphasia and their efficacy has been studied in control studies.

- Bromocriptine – acts on Catecholamine Systems

- Piracetam – mechanism not fully understood, but most likely interacts with cholinergic and glutamatergic receptors, among others

- Cholinergic drugs (Donepezil, Aniracetam, Bifemelane) – acts on acetylcholine systems

- Dopaminergic psychostimulants: (Dexamphetamine, Methylphenidate)

The most effect has been shown by piracetam and amphetamine, which may increase cerebral plasticity and result in an increased capability to improve language function. It has been seen that piracetam is most effective when treatment is begun immediately following stroke. When used in chronic cases it has been much less efficient.

Bromocriptine has been shown by some studies to increase verbal fluency and word retrieval with therapy than with just therapy alone. Furthermore, its use seems to be restricted to non-fluent aphasia.

Donepezil has shown a potential for helping chronic aphasia.

No study has established irrefutable evidence that any drug is an effective treatment for aphasia therapy. Furthermore, no study has shown any drug to be specific for language recovery. Comparison between the recovery of language function and other motor function using any drug has shown that improvement is due to a global increase plasticity of neural networks.

Treatment of APD typically focuses on three primary areas: changing learning environment, developing higher-order skills to compensate for the disorder, and remediation of the auditory deficit itself. However, there is a lack of well-conducted evaluations of intervention using randomized controlled trial methodology. Most evidence for effectiveness adopts weaker standards of evidence, such as showing that performance improves after training. This does not control for possible influences of practice, maturation, or placebo effects. Recent research has shown that practice with basic auditory processing tasks (i.e. auditory training) may improve performance on auditory processing measures and phonemic awareness measures. Changes after auditory training have also been recorded at the physiological level. Many of these tasks are incorporated into computer-based auditory training programs such as Earobics and Fast ForWord, an adaptive software available at home and in clinics worldwide, but overall, evidence for effectiveness of these computerised interventions in improving language and literacy is not impressive. One small-scale uncontrolled study reported successful outcomes for children with APD using auditory training software.

Treating additional issues related to APD can result in success. For example, treatment for phonological disorders (difficulty in speech) can result in success in terms of both the phonological disorder as well as APD. In one study, speech therapy improved auditory evoked potentials (a measure of brain activity in the auditory portions of the brain).

While there is evidence that language training is effective for improving APD, there is no current research supporting the following APD treatments:

- Auditory Integration Training typically involves a child attending two 30-minute sessions per day for ten days.

- Lindamood-Bell Learning Processes (particularly, the Visualizing and Verbalizing program)

- Physical activities that require frequent crossing of the midline (e.g., occupational therapy)

- Sound Field Amplification

- Neuro-Sensory Educational Therapy

- Neurofeedback

However, use of a FM transmitter has been shown to produce significant improvements over time with children.

There is no curative treatment for this condition. Supportive management is helpful.

Treatment for all types of aphasia, including transcortical motor aphasia, is usually provided by a speech-language pathologist. The SLP chooses specific therapy tasks and goals based on the speech and language abilities and needs of the individual. In general for individuals with TMoA, treatment should capitalize on their strong auditory comprehension and repetition skills and address the individual's reduced speech output and difficulty initiating and maintaining a conversation. New research in aphasia treatment is showing the benefit of the Life Participation Approach to Aphasia (LPAA) in which goals are written based on the skills needed by the individual patient to participate in specific real-life situations (i.e. communicating effectively with nurses or gaining employment). Based on the specific needs of the patient, SLPs can provide a variety of treatment activities.

To improve word retrieval and initiation difficulties, clinicians may use confrontation naming in which the patient is asked to name various objects and pictures. Depending on the severity, they may also use sentence completion tasks in which the clinician says sentences with the final word(s) missing and expects the patient to fill in the blank. Limited research suggests that nonsymbolic limb movement on the left side (i.e. tapping the left hand on the table) during sentence production can increase verbal initiations. The use of the left arm in left space stimulates initiation mechanisms in the right hemisphere of the brain which can also be used for language allowing individuals to produce more grammatical sentences with higher fluency and more verbal initiation.

To increase speech output, the clinician may provide a set of pictures and prompt the patient to describe or elaborate on the events pictured. The clinician can also provide spoken or written words and prompt the patient to use the words in a sentence. Additionally, the clinician can ask questions based on the patient’s experiences, opinions, or general knowledge and prompt the patient to answer with phrases or sentences. To work on more connected speech, the clinician may ask the patient to describe procedures such as making a sandwich or doing laundry. A study found that syntax training in which sentence constructions are elicited on a hierarchy of difficulty produced gains in grammatically complete utterances and utterances that successfully communicated novel and accurate information.

To improve conversational skills, SLPs may engage the patient in structured conversations in which supports are provided to help the patient take appropriate conversational turns, maintain the topic of conversation, and formulate appropriate sentences. Clinicians often need to provide pragmatic guidelines so that the patient’s responses go beyond the clinician’s request and so the clinician does not do the majority of the talking. Research shows that conversation therapy can improve percent of complex utterances, the efficiency of the utterances for expressing ideas, and total time spent talking over more traditional stimulation therapy.

In order to improve the patient’s abilities to functionally communicate in their natural settings, the SLP will provide strategies and techniques to enhance their success in communicative settings (i.e. supplementing speech with nonverbal communication). Research supports the use of reduced syntax therapy to help patients overcome the non-fluent speech and agrammatism that often occurs with TMoA. Because agrammatism inhibits the patient's ability to form grammatically correct sentences, this type of treatment involves reducing these agrammatic deficits and teaching the patient to simplify linguistic structures while still conveying the message in order for language used to be more productive in conversation.

Additionally, they may train the patient’s communication partners to support the conversational abilities of the patient by facilitating the use of preserved cognitive and social functions. Research supports the use of various partner training programs such as Supported Conversation for Adults with Aphasia from the Aphasia Institute. In this program, the focus is put on acknowledging the patient’s competence and helping them to reveal that competence. Strategies include saying “I know you know” when appropriate, using gestures to supplement messages, limiting background noise, and given sufficient time for response.

From a neuroscience perspective, research has found that a dopamine agonist, bromocriptine, taken by mouth, has provided positive outcomes during intervention for non-fluent types of aphasia, such as TMoA or adynamic aphasia. Studies have found that bromocriptine increased neural networks which assist with the initiation of speech in individuals who possess non-fluent characteristics of speech.

In order to capitalize on neuroplasticity for treatment of all types of aphasia, timing, intensity, duration, and repetition of treatment should be taken into consideration. Research has found that aphasia treatment initiated during the earlier acute post-injury phase is more effective compared to treatment initiated in the chronic phase. With regard to intensity and duration of treatment, studies reported maximum recovery occurred with intense weekly therapy (approximately 8 hours per week) was delivered over a 2–3 month period. Other research shows that distributed therapy may be more beneficial than high intensity therapy. More research is needed to determine which is best, but it may be found that the ideal duration and intensity of therapy is variable depending on the patient and their needs.

Intervention services will be guided by the strengths and needs determined by the speech and language evaluation. The areas of need may be addressed individually until each one is functional; alternatively, multiple needs may be addressed simultaneously through the intervention techniques. If possible, all interventions will be geared towards the goal of developing typical communicative interaction. To this end, interventions typically follow either a preventive, remedial, or compensatory model. The preventive service model is common as an early intervention technique, especially for children whose other disorders place them at a higher risk for developing later communication problems. This model works to lessen the probability or severity of the issues that could later emerge. The remedial model is used when an individual already has a speech or language impairment that he/she wishes to have corrected. Compensatory models would be used if a professional determines that it is best for the child to bypass the communication limitation; often, this relies on AAC.

Language intervention activities are used in some therapy sessions. In these exercises, an SLP or other trained professional will interact with a child by working with the child through play and other forms of interaction to talk to the child and model language use. The professional will make use of various stimuli, such as books, objects, or simple pictures to stimulate the emerging language. In these activities, the professional will model correct pronunciation, and will encourage the child to practice these skills. Articulation therapy may be used during play therapy as well, but involves modeling specific aspects of language—the production of sound. The specific sounds will be modeled for the child by the professional (often the SLP), and the specific processes involved in creating those sounds will be taught as well. For example, the professional might instruct the child in the placement of the tongue or lips in order to produce certain consonant sounds.

Technology is another avenue of intervention, and can help children whose physical conditions make communication difficult. The use of electronic communication systems allow nonspeaking people and people with severe physical disabilities to engage in the give and take of shared thought.

The only way to treat aphasia is with speech and language therapy (SLT). It will not completely restore the person’s prior level of communication, but SLT can lead to a massive improvement of jargon aphasia. Recipients of this treatment typically achieve better use of residual language abilities, improved language skills, and the ability to communicate in a different way by making up for missing words in their speech[2].

One specific method that has shown to lead to improvements with certain symptoms is “phonological component analysis”, or PCA for short. Participants in PCA therapy tend to improve in the ability to name specific items that they are test on, as well as the decrease in use of nonwords to describe said items. Seeing promising results from this type of therapy has led to much optimism in hopes of developing more treatment methods for jargon aphasia[6].

Currently, there is no standard treatment for expressive aphasia. Most aphasia treatment is individualized based on a patient's condition and needs as assessed by a speech language pathologist. Patients go through a period of spontaneous recovery following brain injury in which they regain a great deal of language function.

In the months following injury or stroke, most patients receive traditional treatment for a few hours per day. Among other exercises, patients practice the repetition of words and phrases. Mechanisms are also taught in traditional treatment to compensate for lost language function such as drawing and using phrases that are easier to pronounce.

Emphasis is placed on establishing a basis for communication with family and caregivers in everyday life. Treatment is individualized based on the patient's own priorities, along with the family's input.

A patient may have the option of individual or group treatment. Although less common, group treatment has been shown to have advantageous outcomes. Some types of group treatments include family counseling, maintenance groups, support groups and treatment groups.

Speech and language therapy is typically the primary treatment for individuals with aphasia. The goal of speech and language therapy is to increase the person’s communication abilities to a level functional for daily life. Goals are chosen based on collaboration between speech language pathologists, patients, and their family/caregivers. Goals should be individualized based on the person’s aphasia symptoms and communicative needs. In 2016, Wallace et al. found the following outcomes were commonly prioritized in therapy: communication, life participation, physical and emotional well-being, normalcy, and health and support services. However, available research is inconclusive about which specific approach to speech and language therapy is most effective in treating global aphasia.

Therapy can be either group or individual. Group therapies that integrate the use of visual aids allow for enhanced social and communication-skill development. Group therapy sessions typically revolve around simple, preplanned activities or games, and aim to facilitate social communication.

One particular therapy designed specifically for treatment of aphasia is Visual Action Therapy (VAT). VAT is a non-verbal gestural output program with 3 phases and 30 total steps. The program teaches unilateral gestures as symbolic representations of real life objects. Research on the effectiveness of VAT is limited and inconclusive.

One important therapy technique includes teaching family members and caregivers strategies for more effectively communicating with their loved ones. Research offers such strategies including, simplifying sentences and using common words, gaining the person's attention before speaking, using pointing and visual cues, allowing for adequate response time, and creating a quiet environment free of distractions.

Another approach to speech and language treatment is constraint-induced language therapy (CILT). CILT involves teaching the patient to use speech in small segments but avoid using gestures and familiar words . The speech language pathologist provides positive feedback throughout and ignores any mistakes made by the patient. The intensity with which this treatment is provided has been debated in the literature. One study, performed in 2015, compared the outcomes of patients with aphasia who received CILT for either 30 hours total over 2 weeks or 30 hours distributed over 10 weeks. Results showed that both groups made significant speech and language improvements. Overall, CILT is an effective treatment at a variety of intensities.

Research supporting the efficacy of pharmacological treatments for aphasia is limited. To date, no large scale clinical trials have proven benefits of pharmacological treatment.

LBLD can be an enduring problem. Some people might experience overlapping learning disabilities that make improvement problematic. Others with single disabilities often show more improvement. Most subjects can achieve literacy via coping mechanisms and education.

Agraphia cannot be directly treated, but individuals can be rehabilitated to regain some of their previous writing abilities.

For the management of phonological agraphia, individuals are trained to memorize key words, such as a familiar name or object, that can then help them form the grapheme for that phoneme. Management of allographic agraphia can be as simple as having alphabet cards so the individual can write legibly by copying the correct letter shapes. There are few rehabilitation methods for apraxic agraphia; if the individual has considerably better hand control and movement with typing than they do with handwriting, then they can use technological devices. Texting and typing do not require the same technical movements that handwriting does; for these technological methods, only spatial location of the fingers to type is required. If copying skills are preserved in an individual with apraxic agraphia, repeated copying may help shift from the highly intentional and monitored hand movements indicative of apraxic agraphia to a more automated control.

Micrographia is a condition that can occur with the development of other disorders, such as Parkinson's disease, and is when handwriting becomes illegible because of small writing. For some individuals, a simple command to write bigger eliminates the issue.

- Anagram and Copy Treatment (ACT) uses the arrangement of component letters of target words and then repeated copying of the target word. This is similar to the CART; the main difference is that the target words for ACT are specific to the individual. Target words that are important in the life of the individual are emphasized because people with deep or global agraphias do not typically have the same memory for the words as other people with agraphia may. Writing can be even more important to these people as it can cue spoken language. ACT helps in this by facilitating the relearning of a set of personally relevant written words for use in communication.

- Copy and Recall Treatment (CART) method helps to reestablish the ability to spell specific words that are learned through repeated copying and recall of target words. CART is more likely to be successful in treating lexical agraphia when a few words are trained to mastery than when a large group of unrelated words is trained. Words chosen can be individualized to the patient, which makes treatment more personalized.

- Graphemic buffer uses the training of specific words to improve spelling. Cueing hierarchies and copy and recall method of specific words are used, to work the words into the short-term memory loop, or graphemic buffer. The segmentation of longer words into shorter syllables helps bring words into short-term memory.

- Problem solving approach is used as a self-correcting method for phonological errors. The individual sounds out the word and attempts to spell it, typically using an electronic dictionary-type device that indicates correct spelling. This method takes advantage of the preserved sound-to-letter correspondences when they are intact. This approach may improve access to spelling memory, strengthen orthographic representations, or both.

The social approach involves a collaborative effort on behalf of patients and clinicians to determine goals and outcomes for therapy that could improve the patient's quality of life. A conversational approach is thought to provide opportunities for development and the use of strategies to overcome barriers to communication.The main goals of this treatment method are to improve the patient's conversational confidence and skills in natural contexts using conversational coaching, supported conversations, and partner training.

1. Conversational coaching involves patients with aphasia and their speech language pathologists, who serve as a "coach" discussing strategies to approach various communicative scenarios. The "coach" will help the patient develop a script for a scenario (such as ordering food at a restaurant), and help the patient practice and perform the scenario in and out of the clinic while evaluating the outcome.

2. Supported conversation also involves using a communicative partner who supports the patient's learning by providing contextual cues, slowing their own rate of speech, and increasing their message's redundancy to promote the patient's comprehension.

Additionally, it is important to include the families of patients with aphasia in treatment programs. Clinicians can teach family members how to support one another, and how to adjust their speaking patterns to facilitate their loved one's treatment and rehabilitation.

When addressing Wernicke’s aphasia, according to Bakheit et al. (2007), the lack of awareness of the language impairments, a common characteristic of Wernicke’s aphasia, may impact the rate and extent of therapy outcomes. Klebic et al. (2011) suggests that people benefit from continuing therapy upon discharge from the hospital to ensure generalization. Robey (1998) determined that at least 2 hours of treatment per week is recommended for making significant language gains. Spontaneous recovery may cause some language gains, but without speech-language therapy, the outcomes can be half as strong as those with therapy.

When addressing Broca’s aphasia, better outcomes occur when the person participates in therapy, and treatment is more effective than no treatment for people in the acute period. Two or more hours of therapy per week in acute and post-acute stages produced the greatest results. High intensity therapy was most effective, and low intensity therapy was almost equivalent to no therapy.

People with global aphasia are sometimes referred to as having irreversible aphasic syndrome, often making limited gains in auditory comprehension, and recovering no functional language modality with therapy. With this said, people with global aphasia may retain gestural communication skills that may enable success when communicating with conversational partners within familiar conditions. Process-oriented treatment options are limited, and people may not become competent language users as readers, listeners, writers, or speakers no matter how extensive therapy is. However, people’s daily routines and quality of life can be enhanced with reasonable and modest goals. After the first month, there is limited to no healing to language abilities of most people. There is a grim prognosis leaving 83% who were globally aphasic after the first month they will remain globally aphasic at the first year. Some people are so severely impaired that their existing process-oriented treatment approaches offer signs of progress, and therefore cannot justify the cost of therapy.

Perhaps due to the relative rareness of conduction aphasia, few studies have specifically studied the effectiveness of therapy for people with this type of aphasia. From the studies performed, results showed that therapy can help to improve specific language outcomes. One intervention that has had positive results is auditory repetition training. Kohn et al. (1990) reported that drilled auditory repetition training related to improvements in spontaneous speech, Francis et al. (2003) reported improvements in sentence comprehension, and Kalinyak-Fliszar et al. (2011) reported improvements in auditory-visual short-term memory.

Most acute cases of aphasia recover some or most skills by working with a speech-language pathologist. Recovery and improvement can continue for years after the stroke. After the onset of Aphasia, there is approximately a six-month period of spontaneous recovery; during this time, the brain is attempting to recover and repair the damaged neurons. Improvement varies widely, depending on the aphasia's cause, type, and severity. Recovery also depends on the person's age, health, motivation, handedness, and educational level.

There is no one treatment proven to be effective for all types of aphasias. The reason that there is no universal treatment for aphasia is because of the nature of the disorder and the various ways it is presented, as explained in the above sections. Aphasia is rarely exhibited identically, implying that treatment needs to be catered specifically to the individual. Studies have shown that, although there is no consistency on treatment methodology in literature, there is a strong indication that treatment in general has positive outcomes. Therapy for aphasia ranges from increasing functional communication to improving speech accuracy, depending on the person's severity, needs and support of family and friends. Group therapy allows individuals to work on their pragmatic and communication skills with other individuals with aphasia, which are skills that may not often be addressed in individual one-on-one therapy sessions. It can also help increase confidence and social skills in a comfortable setting.

Evidence dose not support the use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for improving aphasia after stroke.

Specific treatment techniques include the following:

- Copy and Recall Therapy (CART) - repetition and recall of targeted words within therapy may strengthen orthographic representations and improve single word reading, writing, and naming

- Visual Communication Therapy (VIC) - the use of index cards with symbols to represent various components of speech

- Visual Action Therapy (VAT) - typically treats individuals with global aphasia to train the use of hand gestures for specific items

- Functional Communication Treatment (FCT) - focuses on improving activities specific to functional tasks, social interaction, and self-expression

- Promoting Aphasic's Communicative Effectiveness (PACE) - a means of encouraging normal interaction between people with aphasia and clinicians. In this kind of therapy the focus is on pragmatic communication rather than treatment itself. People are asked to communicate a given message to their therapists by means of drawing, making hand gestures or even pointing to an object

- Melodic Intonation Therapy (MIT) - aims to use the intact melodic/prosodic processing skills of the right hemisphere to help cue retrieval of words and expressive language

- Other - i.e. drawing as a way of communicating, trained conversation partners

Semantic feature analysis (SFA) -a type of aphasia treatment that targets word-finding deficits. It is based on the theory that neural connections can strengthened by using using related words and phrases that are similar to the target word, to eventually activate the target word in the brain. SFA can be implemented in multiple forms such as verbally, written, using picture cards, etc. The SLP provides prompting questions to the individual with aphasia in order for the person to name the picture provided. Studies show that SFA is an effective intervention for improving confrontational naming.

Melodic intonation therapy is used to treat non-fluent aphasia and has proved to be effective in some cases. However, there is still no evidence from randomized controlled trials confirming the efficacy of MIT in chronic aphasia. MIT is used to help people with aphasia vocalize themselves through speech song, which is then transferred as a spoken word. Good candidates for this therapy include people who have had left hemisphere strokes, non-fluent aphasias such as Broca's, good auditory comprehension, poor repetition and articulation, and good emotional stability and memory. An alternative explanation is that the efficacy of MIT depends on neural circuits involved in the processing of rhythmicity and formulaic expressions (examples taken from the MIT manual: “I am fine,” “how are you?” or “thank you”); while rhythmic features associated with melodic intonation may engage primarily left-hemisphere subcortical areas of the brain, the use of formulaic expressions is known to be supported by right-hemisphere cortical and bilateral subcortical neural networks.

According to the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD), involving family with the treatment of an Aphasic loved one is ideal for all involved, because while it will no doubt assist in their recovery, it will also make it easier for members of the family to learn how best to communicate with them.

The intensity of aphasia therapy is determined by the length of each session, total hours of therapy per week, and total weeks of therapy provided. There is no consensus about what “intense” aphasia therapy entails, or how intense therapy should be to yield the best outcomes. A 2016 Cochrane review of speech and language therapy for people with aphasia found that treatments that are higher intensity, higher dose or over a long duration of time led to significantly better functional communication but people were more likely to drop out of high intensity treatment (up to 15 hours per week).

Intensity of therapy is also dependent on the recency of stroke. People with aphasia react differently to intense treatment in the acute phase (0–3 months post stroke), sub-acute phase (3–6 months post stroke), or chronic phase (6+ months post stroke). Intensive therapy has been found to be effective for people with nonfluent and fluent chronic aphasia, but less effective for people with acute aphasia.> People with sub-acute aphasia also respond well to intensive therapy of 100 hours over 62 weeks. This suggests people in the sub-acute phase can improve greatly in language and functional communication measures with intensive therapy compared to regular therapy.

While some speech problems, such as certain voice problems, require medical interventions, many speech problems can be alleviated through effective behavioral interventions and practice. In these cases, instruction in speech techniques or speaking strategies, coupled with regular practice, can help the individual to overcome his/her speaking difficulties. In other, more severe cases, the individual with speech problems may compensate with AAC devices.

Speech impairments can seriously limit the manner in which an individual interacts with others in work, school, social, and even home environments. Inability to correctly form speech sounds might create stress, embarrassment, and frustration in both the speaker and the listener. Over time, this could create aggressive responses on the part of the listener for being misunderstood, or out of embarrassment. Alternatively, it could generate an avoidance of social situations that create these stressful situations. Language impairments create similar difficulties in communicating with others, but may also include difficulties in understanding what others are trying to say (receptive language). Because of the pervasive nature of language impairments, communicating, reading, writing, and academic success may all be compromised in these students. Similar to individuals with speech impairments, individuals with language impairments may encounter long-term difficulties associated with work, school, social, and home environments.

Auditory comprehension is a primary focus in treatment for Wernicke's aphasia, as it is the main deficit related to this diagnosis. Therapy activities may include:

- Single-word comprehension: A common treatment method used to support single-word comprehension skills is known as a pointing drill. Through this method, clinicians lay out a variety of images in front of a patient. The patient is asked to point to the image that corresponds to the word provided by the clinician.

- Understanding Spoken Sentences: "Treatment to improve comprehension of spoken sentences typically consists of drills in which patients answer questions, follow directions or verify the meaning of sentences".

- Understanding Conversation: An effective treatment method to support comprehension of discourse includes providing a patient with a conversational sample and asking him or her questions about that sample. Individuals with less severe deficits in auditory comprehension may also be able to retell aspects of the conversation.

Intervention is usually carried out by speech and language therapists, who use a wide range of techniques to stimulate language learning. In the past, there was a vogue for drilling children in grammatical exercises, using imitation and elicitation methods, but such methods fell into disuse when it became apparent that there was little generalisation to everyday situations. Contemporary approaches to enhancing development of language structure are more likely to adopt 'milieu' methods, in which the intervention is interwoven into natural episodes of communication, and the therapist builds on the child's utterances, rather than dictating what will be talked about. In addition, there has been a move away from a focus solely on grammar and phonology toward interventions that develop children's social use of language, often working in small groups that may include typically developing as well as language-impaired peers.

Another way in which modern approaches to remediation differ from the past is that parents are more likely to be directly involved, particularly with preschool children.

A radically different approach has been developed by Tallal and colleagues, who have devised a computer-based intervention, Fast Forword, that involves prolonged and intensive training on specific components of language and auditory processing. The theory underlying this approach maintains that language difficulties are caused by a failure to make fine-grained auditory discriminations in the temporal dimension, and the computerised training materials are designed to sharpen perceptual acuity.

For all these types of intervention, there are few adequately controlled trials that allow one to assess clinical efficacy. In general, where studies have been done, results have been disappointing, though some more positive outcomes have been reported. In 2010, a systematic review of clinical trials assessing the FastForword approach was published, and reported no significant gains relative to a control group.

Treatment for LKS usually consists of medications, such as anticonvulsants and corticosteroids (such as prednisone), and speech therapy, which should be started early. Some patients improve with the use of corticosteroids or adrenocorticotropin hormone (ACTH) which lead researches to believe that inflammation and vasospasm may play a role in some cases of acquired epileptic aphasia.

A controversial treatment option involves a surgical technique called multiple subpial transection in which multiple incisions are made through the cortex of the affected part of the brain beneath the pia mater, severing the axonal tracts in the subjacent white matter. The cortex is sliced in parallel lines to the midtemporal gyrus and perisylvian area to attenuate the spread of the epileptiform activity without causing cortical dysfunction. There is a study by Morrell "et al." in which results were reported for 14 patients with acquired epileptic aphasia who underwent multiple subpial transections. Seven of the fourteen patients recovered age-appropriate speech and no longer required speech therapy. Another 4 of the 14 displayed improvement of speech and understanding instructions given verbally, but they still required speech therapy. Eleven patients had language dysfunction for two or more years. Another study by Sawhney "et al." reported improvement in all three of their patients with acquired epileptic aphasia who underwent the same procedure.

Various hospitals contain programs designed to treat conditions such as LKS like the Children's Hospital Boston and its Augmentative Communication Program. It is known internationally for its work with children or adults who are non-speaking or severely impaired. Typically, a care team for children with LKS consists of a neurologist, a neuropsychologist, and a speech pathologist or audiologist. Some children with behavioral problems may also need to see a child psychologist and a psychopharmacologist. Speech therapy begins immediately at the time of diagnosis along with medical treatment that may include steroids and anti-epileptic or anti-convulsant medications.

Patient education has also proved to be helpful in treating LKS. Teaching them sign language is a helpful means of communication and if the child was able to read and write before the onset of LKS, that is extremely helpful too.

Studies have failed to find clear evidence that language delay can be prevented by training or educating health care professionals in the subject. Overall, some of the reviews show positive results regarding interventions in language delay, but are not curative. (Commentary - Early Identification of Language Delays, 2005)

There is no known cure for autism, although those with Asperger syndrome and those who have autism and require little-to-no support are more likely to experience a lessening of symptoms over time. The main goals of treatment are to lessen associated deficits and family distress, and to increase quality of life and functional independence. In general, higher IQs are correlated with greater responsiveness to treatment and improved treatment outcomes. Although evidence-based interventions for autistic children vary in their methods, many adopt a psychoeducational approach to enhancing cognitive, communication, and social skills while minimizing problem behaviors. It has been argued that no single treatment is best and treatment is typically tailored to the child's needs.

Intensive, sustained special education programs and behavior therapy early in life can help children acquire self-care, social, and job skills. Available approaches include applied behavior analysis, developmental models, structured teaching, speech and language therapy, social skills therapy, and occupational therapy. Among these approaches, interventions either treat autistic features comprehensively, or focus treatment on a specific area of deficit. Generally, when educating those with autism, specific tactics may be used to effectively relay information to these individuals. Using as much social interaction as possible is key in targeting the inhibition autistic individuals experience concerning person-to-person contact. Additionally, research has shown that employing semantic groupings, which involves assigning words to typical conceptual categories, can be benevficial in fostering learning.

There has been increasing attention to the development of evidence-based interventions for young children with ASD. Two theoretical frameworks outlined for early childhood intervention include applied behavioral analysis (ABA) and the developmental social-pragmatic model (DSP). Although ABA therapy has a strong evidence base, particularly in regard to early intensive home-based therapy. ABA's effectiveness may be limited by diagnostic severity and IQ of the person affected by ASD. The Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology has deemed two early childhood interventions as “well-established”: individual comprehensive ABA, and focused teacher-implemented ABA combined with DSP.

Another evidence-based intervention that has demonstrated efficacy is a parent training model, which teaches parents how to implement various ABA and DSP techniques themselves. Various DSP programs have been developed to explicitly deliver intervention systems through at-home parent implementation.

A multitude of unresearched alternative therapies have also been implemented. Many have resulted in harm to autistic people and should not be employed unless proven to be safe.

In October 2015, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) proposed new evidence-based recommendations for early interventions in ASD for children under 3. These recommendations emphasize early involvement with both developmental and behavioral methods, support by and for parents and caregivers, and a focus on both the core and associated symptoms of ASD.

The main goals when treating children with autism are to lessen associated deficits and family distress, and to increase quality of life and functional independence. In general, higher IQs are correlated with greater responsiveness to treatment and improved treatment outcomes. No single treatment is best and treatment is typically tailored to the child's needs. Families and the educational system are the main resources for treatment. Studies of interventions have methodological problems that prevent definitive conclusions about efficacy, however the development of evidence-based interventions has advanced in recent years. Although many psychosocial interventions have some positive evidence, suggesting that some form of treatment is preferable to no treatment, the methodological quality of systematic reviews of these studies has generally been poor, their clinical results are mostly tentative, and there is little evidence for the relative effectiveness of treatment options. Intensive, sustained special education programs and behavior therapy early in life can help children acquire self-care, social, and job skills, and often improve functioning and decrease symptom severity and maladaptive behaviors; claims that intervention by around age three years is crucial are not substantiated. Available approaches include applied behavior analysis (ABA), developmental models, structured teaching, speech and language therapy, social skills therapy, and occupational therapy. Among these approaches, interventions either treat autistic features comprehensively, or focalize treatment on a specific area of deficit. There is some evidence that early intensive behavioral intervention (EIBI), an early intervention model based on ABA for 20 to 40 hours a week for multiple years, is an effective treatment for some children with ASD. Two theoretical frameworks outlined for early childhood intervention include applied behavioral analysis (ABA) and developmental social pragmatic models (DSP). One interventional strategy utilizes a parent training model, which teaches parents how to implement various ABA and DSP techniques, allowing for parents to disseminate interventions themselves. Various DSP programs have been developed to explicitly deliver intervention systems through at-home parent implementation. Despite the recent development of parent training models, these interventions have demonstrated effectiveness in numerous studies, being evaluated as a probable efficacious mode of treatment.

To have a better understanding of a child's communication skills, parents, teachers, speech therapists and language therapists have a greater chance of collecting data that will determine in which area the child needs to be assessed. Children with speech difficulties range from a variety of communication skills, the most common would be literacy and psychosocial. Improving the child's skill can enhance their communication. It all starts with the child and their guardians at home. There are several factor that contribute in their speech such as:

- Waiting until the child has finished speaking

- Refraining from excessive correction and from disproportionate emphasis on correction (lest the child's desire to avoid correction lead him/her to simply shut down speech-production efforts as a crude means of avoiding error generation)

- Providing praise when warranted

- Approaching the child as a communicator partner

- Being an appropriate speaking model

- Exposing the child to literature

- Limiting exposure to television, especially during efforts at parent-child communication

- Asking questions

- Repeating words

- Providing explanations and drawing conclusions