Evaluation of Rehabilitation of Memory in Neurological Disabilities (ReMiND): a randomized controlled trial

Abstract

Objective: The evidence for the effectiveness of memory rehabilitation is inconclusive. The aim was to compare the effectiveness of two group memory rehabilitation programmes with a self -help group control. Design: Single-blind randomized controlled trial. Participants: Participants with memory problems following traumatic brain injury, stroke or multiple sclerosis were recruited from community settings. Interventions: Participants were randomly allocated, in cohorts of four, to compensation or restitution group treatment programmes or a self-help group control. All programmes were manual-based and comprised two individual and ten weekly group sessions. Main measures: Memory functions, mood, and activities of daily living were assessed at baseline and five and seven months after randomization. Results: There were 72 participants (mean age 47.7, SD 10.2 years; 32 men). There was no significant effect of treatment on the Everyday Memory Questionnaire (P = 0.97). At seven months the mean scores were comparable (restitution 36.6, compensation 41.0, self-help 44.1). However, there was a significant difference between groups on the Internal Memory Aids Questionnaire (P = 0.002). The compensation and restitution groups each used significantly more internal memory aids than the self -help group (P < 0.01). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups on me asures of mood, adjustment and activities of daily living (P > 0.05). Conclusions:There results show few statistically significant effects of either compensation or restitution memory group treatment as compared with a self-help group control. Further randomized trials of memory rehabilitation are needed.

Group memory rehabilitation for people with multiple sclerosis: a feasibility randomized controlled trial

“…If sessions were missed, for example due to illness, then participants were invited to attend the next session early in order to catch up on the missed material. The programme was based on the group programmes previously evaluated, 6,20 but both restitution and compensation strategies were included for all participants. The programme included: one introductory session; three sessions on attention training; three sessions on internal memory strategies; two sessions on external memory aids; and one concluding session to bring together everything that had been learned and to reflect on the best strategies for each individual.…”

“…6 The effectiveness of the programme was evaluated with the aim of developing a multicentre randomized trial.…”

Descriptions of memory rehabilitation group interventions for neurological conditions: a systematic review

“…Four of the studies (13,15,18,19) reported that theirs was a manual-based programme, but only two of these manuals (15,18) were accessible. Three of the four studies using a manual (13,15,18) reported how the manual was developed.…”

“…Three of the four studies using a manual (13,15,18) reported how the manual was developed. Although a manual was not used, or not readily accessible, three of the studies (11,12,19) gave session-bysession content, i.e., these three studies gave a clear indication of the topics covered in each group session.…”

Metamemory following childhood brain injury: A consequence of executive impairment

“…In rehabilitation, an approach frequently adopted to circumvent these memory problems involves the implementation of appropriate compensatory strategies (Cicerone et al, 2005;das Nair & Lincoln, 2012;Fleming, Shum, Strong, & Lightbody, 2005;Kaschel et al, 2002;Wilson, 1992). For instance, Kaschel et al (2002) demonstrated that mental imagery training improved the memory performance of patients with TBI more than other standard rehabilitation methods (e.g., practical guidelines to improve memory), and that these improvements were accompanied by positive changes in relatives' ratings of patients' memory functioning at the three-month follow-up.…”