Group cognitive rehabilitation to reduce the psychological impact of multiple sclerosis on quality of life: the CRAMMS RCT

AbstractBackgroundPeople with multiple sclerosis have problems with memory and attention. The effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation has not been established.ObjectivesThe objectives were to assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a cognitive rehabilitation programme for people with multiple sclerosis.DesignThis was a multicentre, randomised controlled trial in which participants were randomised in a ratio of 6 : 5 to receive cognitive rehabilitation plus usual care or usual care alone. Participants were assessed at 6 and 12 months after randomisation.SettingThe trial was set in hospital neurology clinics and community services.ParticipantsParticipants were people with multiple sclerosis who had cognitive problems, were aged 18–69 years, could travel to attend group sessions and gave informed consent.InterventionThe intervention was a group cognitive rehabilitation programme delivered weekly by an assistant psychologist to between four and six participants for 10 weeks.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale – Psychological subscale at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included results from the Everyday Memory Questionnaire, the 30-Item General Health Questionnaire, the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version and a service use questionnaire from participants, and the Everyday Memory Questionnaire – relative version and the Modified Carer Strain Index from a relative or friend of the participant.ResultsOf the 449 participants randomised, 245 were allocated to cognitive rehabilitation (intervention group) and 204 were allocated to usual care (control group). Of these, 214 in the intervention group and 173 in the control group were included in the primary analysis. There was no clinically important difference in the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale – Psychological subscale score between the two groups at the 12-month follow-up (adjusted difference in means –0.6, 95% confidence interval –1.5 to 0.3; p = 0.20). There were no important differences between the groups in relation to cognitive abilities, fatigue, employment, or carer strain at follow-up. However, there were differences, although small, between the groups in the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale – Psychological subscale score at 6 months (adjusted difference in means –0.9, 95% confidence interval –1.7 to –0.1; p = 0.03) and in everyday memory on the Everyday Memory Questionnaire as reported by participants at 6 (adjusted difference in means –5.3, 95% confidence interval –8.7 to –1.9) and 12 months (adjusted difference in means –4.4, 95% confidence interval –7.8 to –0.9) and by relatives at 6 (adjusted difference in means –5.4, 95% confidence interval –9.1 to –1.7) and 12 months (adjusted difference in means –5.5, 95% confidence interval –9.6 to –1.5) in favour of the cognitive rehabilitation group. There were also differences in mood on the 30-Item General Health Questionnaire at 6 (adjusted difference in means –3.4, 95% confidence interval –5.9 to –0.8) and 12 months (adjusted difference in means –3.4, 95% confidence interval –6.2 to –0.6) in favour of the cognitive rehabilitation group. A qualitative analysis indicated perceived benefits of the intervention. There was no evidence of a difference in costs (adjusted difference in means –£574.93, 95% confidence interval –£1878.93 to £729.07) or quality-adjusted life-year gain (adjusted difference in means 0.00, 95% confidence interval –0.02 to 0.02). No safety concerns were raised and no deaths were reported

Goal-orientated cognitive rehabilitation for dementias associated with Parkinson's disease―A pilot randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To examine the appropriateness and feasibility of cognitive rehabilitation for people with dementias associated with Parkinson's in a pilot randomised controlled study. METHODS: This was a single-blind pilot randomised controlled trial of goal-oriented cognitive rehabilitation for dementias associated with Parkinson's. After goal setting, participants were randomised to cognitive rehabilitation (n = 10), relaxation therapy (n = 10), or treatment-as-usual (n = 9). Primary outcomes were ratings of goal attainment and satisfaction with goal attainment. Secondary outcomes included quality of life, mood, cognition, health status, everyday functioning, and carers' ratings of goal attainment and their own quality of life and stress levels. Assessments were at 2 and 6 months following randomisation. RESULTS: At 2 months, cognitive rehabilitation was superior to treatment-as-usual and relaxation therapy for the primary outcomes of self-rated goal attainment (d = 1.63 and d = 1.82, respectively) and self-rated satisfaction with goal attainment (d = 2.04 and d = 1.84). At 6 months, cognitive rehabilitation remained superior to treatment-as-usual (d = 1.36) and relaxation therapy (d = 1.77) for self-rated goal attainment. Cognitive rehabilitation was superior to treatment as usual and/or relaxation therapy in a number of secondary outcomes at 2 months (mood, self-efficacy, social domain of quality of life, carers' ratings of participants' goal attainment) and at 6 months (delayed recall, health status, quality of life, carer ratings of participants' goal attainment). Carers receiving cognitive rehabilitation reported better quality of life, health status, and lower stress than those allocated to treatment-as-usual. CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive rehabilitation is feasible and potentially effective for dementias associated with Parkinson's disease

Rethinking damaged cognition: an expert opinion on cognitive rehabilitation

Cognition is frequently damaged by acquired brain injury (ABI). Impaired thinking is both a symptom in its own right and also a barrier to recovery by impacting their insight and awareness and their engagement with rehabilitation. Here we consider the aims, mechanisms and contexts when the goal is to improve cognitive function in patients with ABI

Moderators, mediators and nonspecific predictors of outcome after cognitive rehabilitation of executive functions in a randomised controlled trial

Moderators, mediators and nonspecific predictors of treatment after cognitive rehabilitation of executive functions in a randomised controlled trial Objective: To explore moderators, mediators and nonspecific predictors of executive functioning after cognitive rehabilitation in a randomised controlled trial, comparing Goal Management Training (GMT) with an active psycho-educative control-intervention, in patients with chronic acquired brain injury. Methods: Seventy patients with executive dysfunction were randomly allocated to GMT (n = 33) or control (n = 37). Outcome measures were established by factor-analysis and included cognitive executive complaints, emotional dysregulation and psychological distress. Results: Higher age and IQ emerged as nonspecific predictors. Verbal memory and planning ability at baseline moderated cognitive executive complaints, while planning ability at six-month follow-up mediated all three outcome measures. Inhibitory cognitive control emerged as a unique GMT specific mediator. A general pattern regardless of intervention was identified; higher levels of self-reported cognitive—and executive–symptoms of emotional dysregulation and psychological distress at six-month follow-up mediated less improvement across outcome factors. Conclusions: The majority of treatment effects were nonspecific to intervention, probably underscoring the variables’ general contribution to outcome of cognitive rehabilitation interventions. Interventions targeting specific cognitive domains, such as attention or working memory, need to take into account the patients’ overall cognitive and emotional self-perceived functioning. Future studies should investigate the identified predictors further, and also consider other predictor candidates

Cognitive rehabilitation for adults with traumatic brain injury to improve occupational outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive impairment in people with traumatic brain injury (TBI) could affect multiple facets of their daily functioning. Cognitive rehabilitation brings about clinically significant improvement in certain cognitive skills. However, it is uncertain if these improved cognitive skills lead to betterments in other key aspects of daily living. We evaluated whether cognitive rehabilitation for people with TBI improves return to work, independence in daily activities, community integration and quality of life. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of cognitive rehabilitation on return to work, independence in daily activities, community integration (occupational outcomes) and quality of life in people with traumatic brain injury, and to determine which cognitive rehabilitation strategy better achieves these outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library; 2017, Issue 3), MEDLINE (OvidSP), Embase (OvidSP), PsycINFO (OvidSP), and clinical trials registries up to 30 March 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA: We identified all available randomized controlled trials of cognitive rehabilitation compared with any other non-pharmacological intervention for people with TBI. We included studies that reported at least one outcome related to : return to work, independence in activities of daily living (ADL), community integration and quality of life. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We evaluated heterogeneity among the included studies and performed meta-analysis only when we could include more than one study in a comparison. We used the online computer programme GRADEpro to assess the quality of evidence, and generate 'Summary of findings' tables. MAIN RESULTS: We included nine studies with 790 participants. Three trials (160 participants) compared cognitive rehabilitation versus no treatment, four trials (144 participants) compared cognitive rehabilitation versus conventional treatment, one trial (120 participants) compared hospital-based cognitive rehabilitation versus home programme and one trial (366 participants) compared one cognitive strategy versus another. Among the included studies, we judged three to be of low risk of bias.There was no difference between cognitive rehabilitation and no intervention in return to work (risk ratio (RR) 1.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 4.39, 1 study; very low-quality evidence). There was no difference between biweekly cognitive rehabilitation for eight weeks and no treatment in community integration (Sydney Psychosocial Reintegration Scale): mean difference (MD) -2.90, 95% CI -12.57 to 6.77, 1 study; low-quality evidence). There was no difference in quality of life between cognitive rehabilitation and no intervention immediately following the 12-week intervention(MD 0.30, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.78, 1 study; low-quality evidence). No study reported effects on independence in ADL.There was no difference between cognitive rehabilitation and conventional treatment in return to work status at six months' follow-up in one study (RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.33; low-quality evidence); independence in ADL at three to four weeks' follow-up in two studies (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.01, 95% CI -0.62 to 0.61; very low-quality evidence); community integration at three weeks' to six months' follow-up in three studies (Community Integration Questionnaire: MD 0.05, 95% CI -1.51 to 1.62; low-quality evidence) and quality of life at six months' follow-up in one study (Perceived Quality of Life scale: MD 6.50, 95% CI -2.57 to 15.57; moderate-quality evidence).For active duty military personnel with moderate-to-severe closed head injury, there was no difference between eight weeks of cognitive rehabilitation administered as a home programme and hospital-based cognitive rehabilitation in achieving return to work at one year' follow-up in one study (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.05; moderate-quality evidence). The study did not report effects on independence in ADL, community integration or quality of life.There was no difference between one cognitive rehabilitation strategy (cognitive didactic) and another (functional experiential) for adult veterans or active duty military service personnel with moderate-to-severe TBI (one study with 366 participants and one year' follow-up) on return to work (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.46; moderate-quality evidence), or on independence in ADL (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.08; low-quality evidence). The study did not report effects on community integration or quality of life.None of the studies reported adverse effects of cognitive rehabilitation. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient good-quality evidence to support the role of cognitive rehabilitation when compared to no intervention or conventional rehabilitation in improving return to work, independence in ADL, community integration or quality of life in adults with TBI. There is moderate-quality evidence that cognitive rehabilitation provided as a home programme is similar to hospital-based cognitive rehabilitation in improving return to work status among active duty military personnel with moderate-to-severe TBI. Moderate-quality evidence suggests that one cognitive rehabilitation strategy (cognitive didactic) is no better than another (functional experiential) in achieving return to work in veterans or military personnel with TBI

Cognitive Rehabilitation for Executive Dysfunction in Parkinson's Disease: Application and Current Directions

Cognitive dysfunction in Parkinson's disease contributes to disability, caregiver strain, and diminished quality of life. Cognitive rehabilitation, a behavioral approach to improve cognitive skills, has potential as a treatment option to improve and maintain cognitive skills and increase quality of life for those with Parkinson's disease-related cognitive dysfunction. Four cognitive rehabilitation programs in individuals with PD are identified from the literature. Characteristics of the programs and outcomes are reviewed and critiqued. Current studies on cognitive rehabilitation in PD demonstrate feasibility and acceptability of a cognitive rehabilitation program for patients with PD, but are limited by their small sample size and data regarding generalization of effects over the long term. Because PD involves progressive heterogeneous physical, neurological, and affective difficulties, future cognitive rehabilitation programs should aim for flexibility and individualization, according to each patient's strengths and deficits

Goal-oriented cognitive rehabilitation in early-stage dementia: study protocol for a multi-centre single-blind randomised controlled trial (GREAT).

yesBackground: Preliminary evidence suggests that goal-oriented cognitive rehabilitation (CR) may be a clinically effective intervention for people with early-stage Alzheimer's disease, vascular or mixed dementia and their carers. This study aims to establish whether CR is a clinically effective and cost-effective intervention for people with early-stage dementia and their carers. Methods/design: In this multi-centre, single-blind randomised controlled trial, 480 people with early-stage dementia, each with a carer, will be randomised to receive either treatment as usual or cognitive rehabilitation (10 therapy sessions over 3 months, followed by 4 maintenance sessions over 6 months). We will compare the effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation with that of treatment as usual with regard to improving self-reported and carer-rated goal performance in areas identified as causing concern by people with early-stage dementia; improving quality of life, self-efficacy, mood and cognition of people with early-stage dementia; and reducing stress levels and ameliorating quality of life for carers of participants with early-stage dementia. The incremental cost-effectiveness of goal-oriented cognitive rehabilitation compared to treatment as usual will also be examined. Discussion: If the study confirms the benefits and cost-effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation, it will be important to examine how the goal-oriented cognitive rehabilitation approach can most effectively be integrated into routine health-care provision. Our aim is to provide training and develop materials to support the implementation of this approach following trial completion. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN2102748

Rehabilitative devices for a top-down approach

In recent years, neurorehabilitation has moved from a "bottom-up" to a "top down" approach. This change has also involved the technological devices developed for motor and cognitive rehabilitation. It implies that during a task or during therapeutic exercises, new "top-down" approaches are being used to stimulate the brain in a more direct way to elicit plasticity-mediated motor re-learning. This is opposed to "Bottom up" approaches, which act at the physical level and attempt to bring about changes at the level of the central neural system. Areas covered: In the present unsystematic review, we present the most promising innovative technological devices that can effectively support rehabilitation based on a top-down approach, according to the most recent neuroscientific and neurocognitive findings. In particular, we explore if and how the use of new technological devices comprising serious exergames, virtual reality, robots, brain computer interfaces, rhythmic music and biofeedback devices might provide a top-down based approach. Expert commentary: Motor and cognitive systems are strongly harnessed in humans and thus cannot be separated in neurorehabilitation. Recently developed technologies in motor-cognitive rehabilitation might have a greater positive effect than conventional therapies

Design Science Paradigm in the Development of Serious Game for Cognitive Rehabilitation

The use of serious games in cognitive rehabilitation would be invaluable to the rehabilitation process and provide advantages that may not be available in conventional rehabilitation. Although many recent game-based interventions for cognitive rehabilitation have been reported in the literature, not much knowledge is available on the best approach to develop usable games for individuals with cognitive disabilities. Therefore, Design Science approach was adopted to find a solution to this problem. This paper explores an existing Design Science framework and methodology, which are then combined and reduced into one single framework. This paper further examines how this framework can be used as a means to develop an artefact that can be used as a guideline in developing serious games for cognitive rehabilitation. The Design Science paradigm works well for the development of serious game for cognitive rehabilitation. This paper concludes with a discussion of the research contributions

Design of Cognitive Rehabilitation Training System using Artificial Intelligence

This study is a study to design a cognitive(dementia) rehabilitation training system using the MMSE-DS protocol and the GDS protocol using artificial intelligence to analyze the user's cognitive ability and infer cognitive domain content correlation inference algorithms. For research on cognitive judgment technology using artificial intelligence, We provide an integrated cognitive rehabilitation service platform, provide customized training content by building a cognitive rehabilitation evaluation and training user data storage and analysis database, and design an algorithm to help improve users' learning ability by building an artificial intelligence system. The user's cognitive ability analysis and cognitive domain content inference algorithm using artificial intelligence is the purpose is to design a cognitive judgment platform and implement a system to apply cognitive evaluation to people with mild cognitive impairment and utilize cognitive rehabilitation content based on cognitive judgment technology system design technology. Through this study, we aim to provide direction for the future field of cognitive rehabilitation combined with artificial intelligenc