Computerized cognitive stimulation and engagement programs in older adults with mild cognitive impairment: comparing feasibility, acceptability, and cognitive and psychosocial effects

Abstract

PurposeMild cognitive impairment (MCI) is associated with a higher risk of dementia and is becoming a topic of interest for pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions. With advances in technology, computer-based cognitive exercises are increasingly integrated into traditional cognitive interventions, such as cognitive training. Another type of cognitive intervention involving technology use is cognitive engagement, consisting of involving participants in highly motivational and mentally challenging activities, such as learning to use a form of new digital technology. This study examined the feasibility and acceptability of a computerized cognitive stimulation (CCS) program and a computerized cognitive engagement (CCE) program, and then compared their effects in older adults with MCI.Patients and methodsIn this randomized study, data from 19 MCI patients were analyzed (n=9 in CCS and n=10 in CCE). The patients attended a group weekly session for a duration of 3 months. Assessments of cognitive and psychosocial variables were conducted at baseline (M0) and at the end of the programs (M3).ResultsAll of the participants attended the 12 sessions and showed a high level of motivation. Attrition rate was very low (one dropout at M3 assessment). At M3, the CCS participants displayed a significant improvement in part B of the Trail Making Test (TMT-B; p=0.03) and self-esteem (p=0.005), while the CCE participants showed a significant improvement in part A of the Trail Making Test (TMT-A; p=0.007) and a higher level of technology acceptance (p=0.006). The two groups did not differ significantly (p>0.05) in cognitive and psychosocial changes after the intervention. However, medium effect sizes (Cohen’s d=0.56; 95% CI =−0.43:1.55) were found on the free recall, favoring the CCS group, as well as on TMT-A (d=0.51; 95% CI =−0.48:1.49) and technology acceptance (d=−0.65; 95% CI =−1.64:0.34), favoring the CCE group.ConclusionBoth interventions were highly feasible and acceptable and allowed improvement in different aspects of cognitive and psychosocial functioning in MCI subjects.

Comparison between physical and cognitive treatment in patients with MCI and Alzheimer’s disease

“…Our data are in agreement with the positive effect of CT on general cognition in AD [15]. Moreover, the positive effects of PT in our RCT are in line with several recent studies in AD [25–30]. As previously reported by our group [28,31], it is possible to stabilize the progressive cognitive dysfunctions in nursing home residents with AD through a specific moderate intensity endurance and resistance training.…”

“…The effects of CT on mental flexibility, memory, executive function, processing speed, attention, and fluid intelligence was demonstrated in a previous RCT [25] and systematic review [33].…”

Can Use of Digital Technologies by People with Dementia Improve Self-Management and Social Participation? A Systematic Review of Effect Studies

“…Of the 47 full texts that were read, only nine studies met all of our inclusion criteria [ 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 ]. Sixteen records were excluded because they were determined not to be reporting results from controlled interventional studies [ 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 ]. Eight records were excluded because outcomes of the intervention were only measured in a laboratory environment [ 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 ].…”

A comprehensive design of a structured technology-based therapy to prevent post intensive care syndrome (CogGYM platform)

“…The newly admitted patients to ICU, who is mechanically ventilated, alert (Glasgow coma scale, GCS ≥ 12) hemodynamically stable and normoglycemia will be included in the study. The studied patients must have some form of active range of motion in at least one upper extremity, and be able to read and write (Djabelkhir et al, 2017;Malinowsky et al, 2015). While, patients who are not able to follow the instructions to perform the program, such as patients with delirium, visual or auditory deficit, and cognitive impairment will be excluded from the study.…”