Effects of a staged integral art-based cognitive intervention (SIACI) program in older adults with cognitive impairments: protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Abstract

Background Given the aging population worldwide and the COVID-19 pandemic, which has been found to be associated with a deterioration in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) symptoms, investigating methods to prevent or delay cognitive decline in preclinical AD and AD itself is important. The trial described in this protocol aims to evaluate the effects of a staged integral art-based cognitive intervention (SIACI) in older adults with CIs (preclinical AD [SCD or MCI] and mild AD), in order to gather evidence on the effects of SIACI on cognition and psychological/psychosocial health gains and determine the mechanisms. Methods The planned study is a single-center, parallel-arm, randomized controlled trial with allocation concealment and outcome assessor blinding. A total of 88 participants will be randomized to two groups: (i) an intervention group that receives the 16-week, 24-session SIACI program and (ii) a waitlist control group (which will receive the SIACI program after completing the follow-up assessment). Global cognitive function, specific domains of cognition (memory, language, executive function, and visuospatial skills), and other health-related outcomes (quality of life, anxiety, depression, sleep quality, and physical activity level) will be measured at baseline, immediately after the intervention, and at the 6-month follow-up. Blood biomarkers, event-related potential (ERP)-P300, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data will be collected at baseline and immediately after the intervention to explore the mechanisms of SIACI. Discussion The trial will elucidate the immediate and long-term effects of SIACI based on neuropsychological testing and blood biomarkers, and neuroscience involving ERP-P300 and MRI parameters will make it possible to explore the mechanisms of SIACI in older adults with CIs. The results will provide evidence on the effectiveness of an AT-based cognitive intervention, which may delay or even halt cognitive decline in preclinical AD and AD itself. Trial registration ChiCTR, ChiCTR2100044959. Registered 03 April 2021.

Diversity and limitations of electroencephalogram and event‐related potential applications in nursing research: A scoping review

“…There are 11 EEG studies and 10 ERP studies. Studies have used EEG methods (Cai et al, 2022; Kwon et al, 2013; Mukherjee et al, 2013; Okubo, 2011; Sun et al, 2020; Yang et al, 2012; Yang et al, 2016) or ERP (Cao et al, 2017; Välimäki et al, 2021; Yan et al, 2022; Zhao et al, 2021) to identify some changes in the neural function of patients in response to the intervention. Studies also used EEG (Fitriana et al, 2021; Grusendorf, 1994; Jin et al, 2022) or ERP (Bi et al, 2022; Cao et al, 2015; Cao, Si, Li, & Guo, 2022; Cao, Si, Li, Guo, & Yue, 2022; Dai et al, 2016; Peters et al, 2014) to explore the difference in brain activity between different severity patients or compared with normal subjects.…”

“…Some studies recorded EEG during intervention or recorded the EEG of participants with eyes open and closed before and after intervention (Severtsen & Bruya, 1986; Wong et al, 2018). Other studies recorded ERP when subjects were performing specific tasks after intervention or in some specific circumstances, that is, using an experimental paradigm, such as the odd ball paradigm (Cui et al, 2021; Peters et al, 2014; Yan et al, 2022; Yasukouchi et al, 1995; Zhao et al, 2021), Stroop task (Cao, Si, Li, & Guo, 2022; Lees et al, 2016; Lees et al, 2020; Lees & Lal, 2017), and passively viewing pictures (Bi et al, 2022; Cao et al, 2017). Forty‐four studies reported the sample size, ranging from one to 414, with an average of 55 and a median of 36.…”

“…Forty‐four studies reported the sample size, ranging from one to 414, with an average of 55 and a median of 36. Eight studies reported the sample size calculations (Benoit et al, 2021; Cai et al, 2022; Campbell‐Yeo et al, 2022; Francisco et al, 2019; Kwon et al, 2013; Shiroshita et al, 2021; Välimäki et al, 2021; Yan et al, 2022), two of which were protocols (Campbell‐Yeo et al, 2022; Yan et al, 2022). Two studies were preregistered before research (Benoit et al, 2021; Campbell‐Yeo et al, 2022).…”

“…Second, more than half of the studies explored the effect of an intervention (such as mindfulness, and cognitive behavioral therapy) on patients' cognitive and other outcomes and understood the mechanism of its effect. At present, two studies (Välimäki et al, 2021; Yan et al, 2022) have combined magnetic resonance imaging data as outcomes. It should be noted that EEG and ERP are not as good for spatial accuracy as for temporal accuracy.…”

Correction: Effects of a staged integral art-based cognitive intervention (SIACI) program in older adults with cognitive impairments: protocol for a randomized controlled trial

“…After publication of this article [ 1 ], the authors reported that the details for affiliation 1 were incorrectly given as ‘Research Center for Nursing Theory and Practice, Fujian Provincial Hospital, No. 134 Dongjie Street, Gulou District, Fuzhou 350001, Fujian Province, China’ but should have been ‘Research Center for Nursing Theory and Practice, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Shengli Clinical Medical College of Fujian Medical University, No.…”