Table 3: Type of stroke. COT group (n = 47) 30 : 17 OLT group (n = 30) 14 : 16 26 (55.32) 2 (4.26) 0 (0) 1 (2.13) 1 (2.13) 13 (27.66) 1 (2.13) 0 (0) 3 (6.39) Infarction : hemorrhage Infarction LAA (%) CE (%) SAO (%) Other causes (%) Undetermined causes (%) Hemorrhage ICH (%) IVH (%) SDH (%) SAH (%) Motor (%) Sensory (%) Global (%) Conduction (%) Transcortical (%) Anomic (%) COT group: group that received language therapy with oriental medicine therapy. OLT group: group that received language therapy only. LAA: large artery atherosclerosis. CE: cardioembolism. SAO: small artery occlusion. ICH: intracerebral hemorrhage. IVH: intraventricular hemorrhage. SDH: subdural hemorrhage. SAH: subarachnoid hemorrhage. P value was obtained by Fisher’s exact test. Table 4: Type of aphasia at time of admission. COT group (n = 47) 7 (14.89) 3 (6.38) 25 (53.19) 1 (2.13) 7 (14.89) 4 (8.51) 10 (33.33) 1 (3.33) 1 (3.33) 1 (3.33) 0 (0) 13 (43.33) 0 (0) 2 (6.67) 1 (3.33) OLT group (n = 30) 6 (20) 3 (10) 16 (53.33) 0 (0) 2 (6.67) 3 (10) 5 P value 0.670 1.000 0.390 1.000 1.000 0.217 1.000 0.149 1.000 P value 0.756 0.673 1.000 1.000 0.469 1.000 Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine COT group: group that received language therapy with oriental medicine therapy. OLT group: group that received language therapy only. P value was evaluated by Fisher’s exact test. with language therapy, the total AQ score increased to 39 ± 31.1, which was a statistically signiﬁcant change according to the Wilcoxon-signed rank test (P = 0.001). All subsections demonstrated improvements in the score and the diﬀerences were statistically signiﬁcant in all subsection scores (Table 5). 3.5. AQ Score before and after Treatment in the COT Group. Before language therapy, the total AQ score was 28.1 ± 25.6 in the OLT group. After 6.6 ± 7.1 weeks of oriental medicine therapy combined with language therapy, the total AQ score increased to 45.3 ± 27.4, which was a statistically signiﬁcant change according to the Wilcoxon signed rank test (P < 0.001). All subsections demonstrated improvements in the score and the diﬀerences were statistically signiﬁcant (Table 5). 3.6. Comparison of the AQ Score Improvements between the COT and OLT Groups: Total Score and Subsection Scores. The COT group (+17.2 ± 11.6) demonstrated greater improvements in the total AQ score than the OLT group did (+12.3 ± 13.6). This result was statistically signiﬁcant (P = 0.021). The subsections demonstrating better results in the COT group were those for spontaneous speech, content delivery, comprehension, auditory verbal comprehension, command performance, repetition, naming, and naming things. Among them, spontaneous speech, content delivery, comprehension, auditory verbal comprehension, and com- mand performance were statistically signiﬁcant. The yes-no section exhibited better results in the OLT group with a delta value (value after − value before) of 9 in the OLT group, and 6 in the COT group. However, these diﬀerences were not statistically signiﬁcant (Table 5). 3.7. Comparison of the AQ Score Improvements between the COT and OLT Groups: Distribution of Severity. Before language therapy, 66% of patients in the COT group and 76.7% of patients in the OLT group demonstrated severe aphasia. After language therapy, 38.3% of the COT group and 56.7% of the OLT group demonstrated severe aphasia. After language therapy, 41.9% of patients in the COT group and 26.1% of patients in OLT group with severe aphasia were converted into non-severe aphasia. The aphasia subsided in one patient in the COT group. In this change of severe aphasia distribution, the COT group reveals statistically signiﬁcance. The OLT group also shows statistically signiﬁcance. Before and after treatment, there