A randomized control trial to evaluate a paging system for people with traumatic brain injury

Abstract

Although memory problems following acquired brain damage are common, some people are able to compensate for these problems through external aids. It was recently demonstrated that a paging system could reduce the everyday memory and planning problems for people with non-progressive brain injury. The 143 patients who participated in the study comprised several diagnostic groups. This paper reports on the sub-group of people with TBI (n=63). This sub-group was part of the larger sample of 143 already published in the 2001 study. A randomized control cross-over design randomly allocated people to group A (pager first) or group B (waiting list first). Each participant chose their own tasks for which they needed reminders. During a 2 week baseline, successful task achievement was documented. Group A achieved 47.14% of tasks and group B 47.88%. People in group A then received a pager for 7 weeks. During the last 2 weeks of this 7 week period, task achievement was documented again. Group A now achieved 71.80% of tasks and group B (on the waiting list) achieved 49.05% (no different from baseline). Group A then returned their pagers and group B received pagers. During the last 2 weeks of this stage participants were monitored once more. At this point, people in group A had dropped back slightly but were still statistically significantly better than during the baseline (67.23%). Group B, meanwhile, were now achieving 73.62% of tasks. This was statistically significantly better than baseline and significantly better than group A, now in the post-pager phase. It is concluded that this paging system significantly reduces the everyday memory and planning problems of people with TBI.

Use of Patient Pagers in a Diagnostic Breast Clinic: An Example of Service Improvement and Patient-Centred Care

“…Wilson et al conducted a randomised controlled trial asking a group of 63 patients with memory problems what specific reminders they would find helpful and pagers improved task achievement from 47% to 72%. 9 It is difficult to comment on the cost effectiveness of such a system. As yet no cost-effectiveness studies have been published in this area.…”

Treating Persons With Traumatic Brain Injury

“…Both low-tech (paper) and high-tech methods (computers, cell phones) have been shown to be effective for improving memory [36]. Pagers, personal data assistants, computers, smart phones, and accompanying applications are all highly effective memory prostheses for the person with TBI, and these devices can be individually tailored to his or her needs [37]. While the steps to use these devices must be carefully trained and practiced, a memory log with a calendar, schedule, and important telephone numbers or e-mail addresses can be an effective, low-tech, lowcost intervention [36].…”

Professionals’ views on the use of smartphone technology to support children and adolescents with memory impairment due to acquired brain injury

“…In addition they often have multiple functions and applications that can support memory, such as calendars and voice recorders [1,4]. A number of studies have shown that electronic compensatory memory aids, such as pagers [12,13], mobile phones [14,15], PDAs [1,10,16,17] and smartphones [18,19,20] can be effective in supporting prospective memory in adults with brain injury, by helping them to remember and complete everyday tasks. A recent systematic review also concluded that external assistive devices reduce forgetfulness in adults after traumatic brain injury (TBI) or stroke [21].…”

“…Smartphones have become increasingly popular in memory rehabilitation because they have many functions and applications that can help people with memory impairment, for example calendars, alarms, to-do lists, texts and voice recorders [1,5]. Additionally, many children and adolescents already use smartphones, with 62% of [12][13][14][15] year olds owning a smartphone in the UK [23]. Thus, for children and adolescents, smartphones could be viewed as desirable assistive devices as they are popular, inconspicuous and do not highlight their deficits to others [5,18,22].…”