scholarly journals A group memory rehabilitation programme for people with traumatic brain injuries: the ReMemBrIn RCT

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (16) ◽  
pp. 1-194 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roshan das Nair ◽  
Lucy E Bradshaw ◽  
Hannah Carpenter ◽  
Sara Clarke ◽  
Florence Day ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Usual Care ◽  
Goal Attainment ◽  
Brain Injuries ◽  
Rehabilitation Programme ◽  
Group Memory ◽  
Memory Problems ◽  
Everyday Memory Questionnaire ◽  
Memory Rehabilitation

BackgroundPeople with traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) commonly report memory impairments. These are persistent, debilitating and reduce quality of life, but patients do not routinely receive memory rehabilitation after discharge from hospital.ObjectiveTo assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a group memory rehabilitation programme for people with TBI.DesignMulticentre, pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial. Qualitative and health economic evaluations were also undertaken.SettingCommunity settings in nine sites in England.ParticipantsParticipants were aged 18–69 years, had undergone a TBI > 3 months prior to recruitment, reported memory problems, were able to travel to a site to attend group sessions, could communicate in English and gave informed consent.Randomisation and blindingClusters of four to six participants were randomised to the memory rehabilitation arm or the usual-care arm on a 1 : 1 ratio. Randomisation was based on a computer-generated pseudo-random code using random permuted blocks of randomly varying size, stratified by study site. Participants and therapists were aware of the treatment allocation whereas outcome assessors were blinded.InterventionsIn the memory rehabilitation arm 10 weekly sessions of a manualised memory rehabilitation programme were provided in addition to usual care. Participants were taught restitution strategies to retrain impaired memory functions and compensation strategies to enable them to cope with memory problems. The usual-care arm received usual care only.Main outcome measuresOutcomes were assessed at 6 and 12 months after randomisation. Primary outcome: patient-completed Everyday Memory Questionnaire – patient version (EMQ-p) at 6 months’ follow-up. Secondary outcomes: Rivermead Behavioural Memory Test – third edition (RBMT-3), General Health Questionnaire 30-item version, European Brain Injury Questionnaire, Everyday Memory Questionnaire – relative version and individual goal attainment. Costs (based on a UK NHS and Personal Social Services perspective) were collected using a service use questionnaire, with the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version, used to derive quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). A Markov model was developed to explore cost-effectiveness at 5 and 10 years, with a 3.5% discount applied.ResultsWe randomised 328 participants (memory rehabilitation,n = 171; usual care,n = 157), with 129 in the memory rehabilitation arm and 122 in the usual-care arm included in the primary analysis. We found no clinically important difference on the EMQ-p between the two arms at 6 months’ follow-up (adjusted difference in mean scores –2.1, 95% confidence interval –6.7 to 2.5;p = 0.37). For secondary outcomes, differences favouring the memory rehabilitation arm were observed at 6 months’ follow-up for the RBMT-3 and goal attainment, but remained only for goal attainment at 12 months’ follow-up. There were no differences between arms in mood or quality of life. The qualitative results suggested positive experiences of participating in the trial and of attending the groups. Participants reported that memory rehabilitation was not routinely accessible in usual care. The primary health economics outcome at 12 months found memory rehabilitation to be £26.89 cheaper than usual care but less effective, with an incremental QALY loss of 0.007. Differences in costs and effects were not statistically significant and non-parametric bootstrapping demonstrated considerable uncertainty in these findings. No safety concerns were raised and no deaths were reported.LimitationsAs a pragmatic trial, we had broad inclusion criteria and, therefore, there was considerable heterogeneity within the sample. The study was not powered to perform further subgroup analyses. Participants and therapists could not be blinded to treatment allocation.ConclusionsThe group memory rehabilitation delivered in this trial is very unlikely to lead to clinical benefits or to be a cost-effective treatment for people with TBI in the community. Future studies should examine the selection of participants who may benefit most from memory rehabilitation.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN65792154.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full inHealth Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 16. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

scholarly journals Randomized controlled study of the impact of a participatory patient care plan among primary care patients with common chronic diseases: a one-year follow-up study

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nina Tusa ◽  
Hannu Kautiainen ◽  
Pia Elfving ◽  
Sanna Sinikallio ◽  
Pekka Mäntyselkä
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Patient Care ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Care Plan ◽  
Health Related Quality ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Disease Specific

Abstract Backround Chronic diseases and multimorbidity are common in the ageing population and affect the health related quality of life. Health care resources are limited and the continuity of care has to be assured. Therefore it is essential to find demonstrable tools for best treatment practices for patients with chronic diseases. Our aim was to study the influence of a participatory patient care plan on the health-related quality of life and disease specific outcomes related to diabetes, ischemic heart disease and hypertension. Methods The data of the present study were based on the Participatory Patient Care Planning in Primary Care. A total of 605 patients were recruited in the Siilinjärvi Health Center in the years 2017–2018 from those patients who were followed up due to the treatment of hypertension, ischemic heart disease or diabetes. Patients were randomized into usual care and intervention groups. The intervention consisted of a participatory patient care plan, which was formulated in collaboration with the patient and the nurse and the physician during the first health care visit. Health-related quality of life with the 15D instrument and the disease-specific outcomes of body mass index (BMI), low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), hemoglobin A1c (HbA1C) and blood pressure were assessed at the baseline and after a one-year follow-up. Results A total of 587 patients with a mean age of 69 years were followed for 12 months. In the intervention group there were 289 patients (54% women) and in the usual care group there were 298 patients (50% women). During the follow-up there were no significant changes between the groups in health-related quality and disease-specific outcomes. Conclusions During the 12-month follow-up, no significant differences between the intervention and the usual care groups were detected, as the intervention and the usual care groups were already in good therapeutic equilibrium at the baseline. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02992431. Registered 14/12/2016

scholarly journals P181 Long-term improvement in axial spondyloarthritis clinical outcomes following 2-weeks of intensive education and rehabilitation: results from the Bath residential rehabilitation programme

Rheumatology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 60 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosie Barnett ◽  
Anita McGrogan ◽  
Matthew Young ◽  
Charlotte Cavill ◽  
Mandy Freeth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Physical Activity ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Axial Spondyloarthritis ◽  
Rehabilitation Programme ◽  
Spinal Mobility ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background/Aims  Axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) is a chronic rheumatic condition, characterised by inflammatory back pain - often associated with impaired function and mobility, sleep disturbance, fatigue, and reduced quality of life. Despite the vast advances in pharmacological treatments for axSpA over the last few decades, physical activity and rehabilitation remain vital for effective disease management. At the Royal National Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases in Bath (RNHRD), the 2-week inpatient axSpA rehabilitation programme has been integral to axSpA care since the 1970’s. Prior research has demonstrated significant short-term improvements in spinal mobility (BASMI), function (BASFI) and disease activity (BASDAI) following course attendance. However, the long-term outcomes are yet to be evaluated in this unique cohort. Methods  Since the early 1990’s, clinical measures of spinal mobility, function and disease activity have been routinely collected at the RNHRD at all clinical appointments through administration of the BASMI, BASFI and BASDAI, respectively. Dates of attending the axSpA course and standard clinical and treatment follow-up data were also collected. Multiple linear regression models were used to investigate the impact of course attendance on final reported BASMI, BASDAI and BASFI scores (final score=most recent). Length of follow-up was defined as time between first and last recorded BASMI. Results  Of the 203 patients within the Bath SPARC200 cohort, 77.8% (158/203) had attended at least one rehabilitation course throughout follow-up. 70.0% (140/203) of patients were male. The mean duration of follow-up was 13.5 years (range 0-35 years); 28.1% (57/203) of individuals with 20+ years of follow-up. Course attendance (yes versus no) significantly reduced final BASMI score by 0.84 (p = 0.001, 95%CI -1.31 to -0.37) and final BASDAI score by 0.74 (p = 0.018, 95%CI -1.34 to -0.13). Although course attendance reduced final BASFI by 0.45 (95%CI -1.17 to 0.28), this relationship did not reach significance (p = 0.225). Whilst minimally clinically important difference (MCID) is, to our knowledge, yet to be defined for BASMI, MCIDs were achieved long-term for both BASDAI and BASFI - defined by van der Heijde and colleagues in 2016 as 0.7 and 0.4 for BASDAI and BASFI, respectively. Conclusion  These results provide novel evidence to support the integral role of education, physical activity and rehabilitation in the management of axSpA. Future work should investigate additional outcomes of critical importance to patients and clinicians, such as fatigue, quality of life and work productivity. Furthermore, a greater understanding of the factors that confound these outcomes may provide insights into those patients who may most benefit from attending a 2-week rehabilitation course. In addition to facilitating identification of those patients who may require additional clinical support. Disclosure  R. Barnett: None. A. McGrogan: None. M. Young: None. C. Cavill: None. M. Freeth: None. R. Sengupta: Honoraria; Biogen, Celgene, AbbVie, Novartis, MSD. Grants/research support; Novartis, UCB.

scholarly journals A physical activity program versus usual care in the management of quality of life for pre-frail older adults with chronic pain in primary care: randomized controlled trial.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pedro Otones ◽  
Eva García ◽  
Teresa Sanz ◽  
Azucena Pedraz
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Physical Activity ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Physical Performance ◽  
Frail Older Adults

Abstract Background Exercise have shown being effective for managing chronic pain and preventing frailty status in older adults but the effect of an exercise program in the quality of life of pre-frail older adults with chronic pain remains unclear. Our objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of multicomponent structured physical exercise program for pre-frail adults aged 65 years or more with chronic pain to improve their perceived health related quality of life, compared with usual care. Methods Open label randomized controlled trial. Participants were community-dwelling pre-frail older adults aged 65 years or older with chronic pain and non-dependent for basic activities of daily living attending a Primary Healthcare Centre. Forty-four participants were randomly allocated to a control group (n = 20) that received usual care or an intervention group (n = 24) that received an 8-week physical activity and education program. Frailty status (SHARE Frailty Index), quality of life (EuroQol-5D-5L), pain intensity (Visual Analogue Scale), physical performance (Short Physical Performance Battery) and depression (Yessavage) were assessed at baseline, after the intervention and after 3 months follow-up. The effect of the intervention was analysed by mean differences between the intervention and control groups. Results The follow-up period (3 months) was completed by 32 patients (73%), 17 in the control group and 15 in the intervention group. Most participants were women (78.1%) with a mean age (standard deviation) of 77.2 (5.9) years and a mean pain intensity of 48.1 (24.4) mm. No relevant differences were found between groups at baseline. After the intervention, mean differences in the EuroQol Index Value between control and intervention groups were significant (-0.19 95%CI(-0.33- -0.04)) and remained after three months follow-up (-0.21 95%CI(-0.37- -0.05)). Participants in the exercise group showed better results in pain intensity and frailty after the intervention, and an improvement in physical performance after the intervention and after three months. Conclusions An eight-week physical activity and education program for pre-frail older adults with chronic pain, compared with usual care, could be effective to improve quality of life after the intervention and after three-months follow-up. Study registration details: This study was retrospectively registered in ClinicalTrials.gov with the identifier NCT04045535.

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

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-182 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadina B Lincoln ◽  
Lucy E Bradshaw ◽  
Cris S Constantinescu ◽  
Florence Day ◽  
Avril ER Drummond ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Cognitive Rehabilitation ◽  
Rehabilitation Programme ◽  
Everyday Memory ◽  
Impact Scale ◽  
The Everyday ◽  
Everyday Memory Questionnaire ◽  
Memory Questionnaire

Background People with multiple sclerosis have problems with memory and attention. The effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation has not been established. Objectives The objectives were to assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a cognitive rehabilitation programme for people with multiple sclerosis. Design This 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. Setting The trial was set in hospital neurology clinics and community services. Participants Participants were people with multiple sclerosis who had cognitive problems, were aged 18–69 years, could travel to attend group sessions and gave informed consent. Intervention The intervention was a group cognitive rehabilitation programme delivered weekly by an assistant psychologist to between four and six participants for 10 weeks. Main outcome measures The 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. Results Of 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. Limitations The trial included a sample of participants who had relatively severe cognitive problems in daily life. The trial was not powered to perform subgroup analyses. Participants could not be blinded to treatment allocation. Conclusions This cognitive rehabilitation programme had no long-term benefits on quality of life for people with multiple sclerosis. Future work Future research should evaluate the selection of those who may benefit from cognitive rehabilitation. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN09697576. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 4. See the National Institute for Health Research Journals Library website for further project information.

Abstract 225: A Depression Quality Program and Cardiovascular Disease: Assessing the Impact on Care

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda Gordon ◽  
Amanda Malecky ◽  
Andrew Althouse ◽  
Nicole Ansani
Keyword(s):  
Usual Care ◽  
Goal Attainment ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Phone Call ◽  
Categorical Variables ◽  
Care Group ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Surrogate Outcome ◽  
The Impact

Background: Data demonstrate an adverse association between depression and coronary artery disease prognosis. Therefore, a depression screening program was initiated in the catheterization (cath) lab. The goals were to improve HEDIS depression compliance rates and determine the impact on clinical outcomes. Methods: Adult patients in an inpatient cath lab from 3 cardiology practices were screened for enrollment in a randomized controlled trial. All cath lab patients received a PHQ-9 depression screener. Those who screened positive for depression (score ≥ 10) were randomized to intervention or usual care. The usual care group received a follow-up phone call to re-administer the PHQ-9 at 6-8 weeks and within 210 days of discharge. The intervention group was administered the PHQ-9 and received intensive education at baseline, 6-8 weeks, and within 210 days of discharge. Education included targeted depression information with a mental health care provider and comprehensive disease management education with a cardiovascular nurse practitioner. Outcomes included: differences in HEDIS depression goal attainment; depression response/remission rates; and cardiovascular goals. Differences between groups were tested using chi-squared tests (categorical variables) and t-tests (continuous variables). Results: Baseline characteristics were similar between control (N=43) and intervention (N=40) groups, with the exception of significantly fewer African American patients in the control group (N=2, 4.7%) vs intervention (N=9, 22.5%). Changes in HEDIS goal attainment show that patients in the intervention group were slightly more likely to be referred to a provider to address depression (95.0% vs 86.0%, p=0.314), or receive meds for depression (65.0% vs 51.2%, p=0.219), but these differences are not statistically significant. More patients in the intervention group refused meds for depression compared to control (15.0% vs. 2.3%, p=0.041); have received blood work (65.0% vs 41.9%, p=0.030); and have received follow-up within 210 days (82.5% vs 46.5%, p<0.001). Treatment adjustment rate was higher in the intervention group compared to control (85.0% vs. 65.1%, p=0.037). Hospital readmission rate was similar between groups (p=0.896) and there was no difference in depression remission or response rates (p=0.426). Further, no differences were seen in cardiovascular surrogate outcome parameters, including cholesterol, A1c, CRP, or BNP between groups; except SGOT was significantly different between groups (-5.0 intervention vs 2.0 control p=0.045). Conclusions: These data demonstrate improvements in attaining a surrogate outcome measure of quality (HEDIS goals); however, this does not appear to translate to a significant clinical impact. Quality measures may need to be continuously reassessed to ensure efficiency and effectiveness of care.

OP56 Rehabilitation Of Memory In Brain Injury: A Cost-Utility Analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (S1) ◽  
pp. 20-21
Author(s):  
Shaun Harris ◽  
Deborah Fitzsimmons ◽  
Roshan das Nair ◽  
Lucy Bradshaw
Keyword(s):  
Usual Care ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Utility Analysis ◽  
Considerable Uncertainty ◽  
Memory Rehabilitation ◽  
The Impact

Introduction:People with traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) commonly report memory impairments which are persistent, debilitating, and reduce quality of life. As part of the Rehabilitation of Memory in Brain Injury trial, a cost-effectiveness analysis was undertaken to examine the comparative costs and effects of a group memory rehabilitation program for people with TBI.Methods:Individual-level cost and outcome data were collected. Patients were randomized to usual care (n=157) or usual care plus memory rehabilitation (n=171). The primary outcome for the economic analysis was the EuroQol-5D quality of life score at 12 months. A UK NHS costing perspective was used. Missing data was addressed by multiple imputation. One-way sensitivity analyses examined the impact of varying different parameters, and the impact of available cases, on base case findings whilst non-parametric bootstrapping examined joint uncertainty.Results:At 12 months, the intervention was GBP 26.89 (USD 35.76) (SE 249.15) cheaper than usual care; but this difference was statistically non-significant (p=0.914). At 12 months, a QALY loss of −0.007 was observed in the intervention group confidence interval (95% CI: −0.025–0.012) and a QALY gain seen in the usual care group 0.004 (95% CI: -0.017–0.025). This difference was not statistically significant (p=0.442). The base case analysis gave an ICER of GBP 2,445 (USD 3,252) reflecting that the intervention was less effective and less costly compared to usual care. Sensitivity analyses illustrated considerable uncertainty. When joint uncertainty was examined, the probability of the intervention being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of GBP 20,000 per QALY gain was 29 percent and 24 percent at GBP 30,000.Conclusions:Our cost-utility analysis indicates that memory rehabilitation was cheaper but less effective than usual care but these findings must be interpreted in the light of small statistically non–significant differences and considerable uncertainty was evident. The ReMemBrIn intervention is unlikely to be considered cost-effective for people with TBI.

scholarly journals A Children’s Asthma Education Program: Roaring Adventures of Puff (RAP), Improves Quality of Life

2010 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 67-73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shawna L McGhan ◽  
Eric Wong ◽  
Heather M Sharpe ◽  
Patrick A Hessel ◽  
Puish Mandhane ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Education Program ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Asthma Management ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Asthma Education ◽  
Children With Asthma

BACKGROUND: It is postulated that children with asthma who receive an interactive, comprehensive education program would improve their quality of life, asthma management and asthma control compared with children receiving usual care.OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility and impact of ‘Roaring Adventures of Puff’ (RAP), a six-week childhood asthma education program administered by health professionals in schools.METHODS: Thirty-four schools from three health regions in Alberta were randomly assigned to receive either the RAP asthma program (intervention group) or usual care (control group). Baseline measurements from parent and child were taken before the intervention, and at six and 12 months.RESULTS: The intervention group had more smoke exposure at baseline. Participants lost to follow-up had more asthma symptoms. Improvements were significantly greater in the RAP intervention group from baseline to six months than in the control group in terms of parent’s perceived understanding and ability to cope with and control asthma, and overall quality of life (P<0.05). On follow-up, doctor visits were reduced in the control group.CONCLUSION: A multilevel, comprehensive, school-based asthma program is feasible, and modestly improved asthma management and quality of life outcomes. An interactive group education program offered to children with asthma at their school has merit as a practical, cost-effective, peer-supportive approach to improve health outcomes.

scholarly journals It is not only memory: effects of sensecam on improving well-being in patients with mild alzheimer disease

2017 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 741-754 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Rita Silva ◽  
Maria Salomé Pinho ◽  
Luís Macedo ◽  
Christopher Moulin ◽  
Salomé Caldeira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Cognitive Rehabilitation ◽  
Affective State ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Memory Training ◽  
Depressive Symptomology ◽  
Rehabilitation Programs ◽  
Memory Rehabilitation

ABSTRACTBackground:Cognitive interventions (either restorative or compensatory) developed for mild Alzheimer's Disease (AD) have been tested widely with cognitive measures, but less is known about how the effects of such interventions are generalizable to daily functioning. In the present study, we looked at affective state and perceived functionality and quality of life indicators, for three different cognitive rehabilitation programs.Methods:Fifty-one AD patients in the mild stage of the disease were selected for the study and were randomly assigned to one of three cognitive training groups: (1) Memo+ (a paper and pencil memory training program); (2) SenseCam (wearable camera used as a passive external memory aid); (3) Written diary (a personal journal, used as control condition). All patients attended 11 sessions, twice a week, of 1-hour length. The three outcome indicators were examined with standardized instruments applied before the intervention, one week after and at six months follow-up.Results:After treatment, the SenseCam and Memo+ groups had significantly reduced depressive symptoms compared to the Diary control condition. The same was found for measures of perceived functional capacity. No intervention effects were found for quality of life measures. The immediate effects of the interventions were not maintained at follow-up.Conclusions:Our results suggest that two types of memory rehabilitation can improve depressive symptomology and instrumental activities of daily living, suggesting that these interventions can stimulate not only cognition but also well-being, at least in the short term.

scholarly journals 154 Specialised Memory and Attention Rehabilitation Therapy (SMART) Programme

2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (Supplement_3) ◽  
pp. iii1-iii16
Author(s):  
Aislinn Griffin
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Cognitive Rehabilitation ◽  
Functional Performance ◽  
Performance Measure ◽  
Acute Hospital ◽  
Rehabilitation Programme ◽  
Rehabilitation Therapy ◽  
Memory And Attention

Abstract Background The population of Ireland is ageing and the number of people with dementia in the coming years will be significant and could be as high as 132,000 people by 2041 (Pierce et al 2014). This estimated prediction highlighted the importance and value of developing and implementing interventions that will meet the needs of individuals with dementia and their carers in the community. We identified the need for a cognitive rehabilitation programme in an acute hospital and developed the “Specialised Memory and Attention Rehabilitation Therapy (SMART) Programme”. The aim of the programme is to improve quality of life, cognitive ability and performance of meaningful occupations for individuals with dementia in the community. Methods The SMART programme uses an evidence based approach of education, process training, strategy training and function for delivery to individuals with dementia and their carers. It is a seven week programme with a three month follow up appointment. Weeks one, seven and three month follow up are 1:1 assessments where outcome measures are completed. There is a group intervention programme for five weeks which includes a patient booklet with education sheets, strategy, work and homework sheets as well as functional tasks. Results There was statistically significant results pre and post intervention in the Rivermead Behavioural Memory test, Canadian Occupational Performance Measure, Functional Independence Measure and the DEMQoL – Dementia quality of life questionnaire. Overall, the results showed statistically significant improvements in memory function, clinically significant gains in terms of perceived functional performance & satisfaction and objective and significant improvements in functional performance. Conclusion The findings have demonstrated potential to significantly improve participants’ cognitive function and have shown functional significant gains as a result both objectively and subjectively. The findings have also demonstrated the feasibility of successfully implementing a cognitive rehabilitation programme on an outpatient basis in an acute hospital setting.

scholarly journals A systematic review of personal smart technologies used to improve outcomes in adults with acquired brain injuries

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (11) ◽  
pp. 1705-1712 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jade Kettlewell ◽  
Roshan das Nair ◽  
Kate Radford
Keyword(s):  
Brain Injury ◽  
Goal Attainment ◽  
Brain Injuries ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Acquired Brain Injury ◽  
Reference List ◽  
Smart Technology ◽  
Smart Technologies ◽  
Author Citations

Objective: This review aimed to determine the effectiveness of personal smart technologies on outcomes in adults with acquired brain injury. Data sources: A systematic literature search was conducted on 30 May 2019. Twelve electronic databases, grey literature databases, PROSPERO, reference list and author citations were searched. Methods: Randomised controlled trials were included if personal smart technology was used to improve independence, goal attainment/function, fatigue or quality of life in adults with acquired brain injury. Data were extracted using a bespoke form and the TIDieR checklist. Studies were graded using the PEDro scale to assess quality of reporting. Meta-analysis was conducted across four studies. Results: Six studies met the inclusion criteria, generating a total of 244 participants. All studies were of high quality (PEDro ⩾ 6). Interventions included personal digital assistant, smartphone app, mobile phone messaging, Neuropage and an iPad. Reporting of intervention tailoring for individual needs was inconsistent. All studies measured goal attainment/function but none measured independence or fatigue. One study ( n = 42) reported a significant increase in memory-specific goal attainment ( p = 0.0001) and retrospective memory function ( p = 0.042) in favour of the intervention. Another study ( n = 8) reported a significant increase in social participation in favour of the intervention ( p = 0.01). However, our meta-analyses found no significant effect of personal smart technology on goal attainment, cognitive or psychological function. Conclusion: At present, there is insufficient evidence to support the clinical benefit of personal smart technologies to improve outcomes in acquired brain injury. Researchers need to conduct more randomised studies to evaluate these interventions and measure their potential effects/harms.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document