Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Jun 5;6:CD003260. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003260.pub2.

Cognitive training and cognitive rehabilitation for mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease and vascular dementia.

Author information

  • 1Centre for Research on Ageing, Health, and Wellbeing, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia. alex.baharfuchs@anu.edu.au

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Cognitive impairments, particularly memory problems, are a defining feature of the early stages of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and vascular dementia. Cognitive training and cognitive rehabilitation are specific interventional approaches designed to address difficulties with memory and other aspects of cognitive functioning. The present review is an update of previous versions of this review.

OBJECTIVES:

The main aim of the current review was to evaluate the effectiveness and impact of cognitive training and cognitive rehabilitation for people with mild Alzheimer's disease or vascular dementia in relation to important cognitive and non-cognitive outcomes for the person with dementia and the primary caregiver in the short, medium and long term.

SEARCH METHODS:

The CDCIG Specialized Register, ALOIS, which contains records from MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, LILACS and many other clinical trial databases and grey literature sources, was most recently searched on 2 November 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA:

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), published in English, comparing cognitive rehabilitation or cognitive training interventions with control conditions, and reporting relevant outcomes for the person with dementia and/or the family caregiver, were considered for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:

Eleven RCTs reporting cognitive training interventions were included in the review. A large number of measures were used in the different studies, and meta-analysis could be conducted for 11 of the primary and secondary outcomes of interest. Several outcomes were not measured in any of the studies. The unit of analysis in the meta-analysis was the change from baseline score. Overall estimates of treatment effect were calculated using a fixed-effect model, and statistical heterogeneity was measured using a standard Chi(2) statistic. One RCT of cognitive rehabilitation was identified, allowing examination of effect sizes, but no meta-analysis could be conducted.

MAIN RESULTS:

Cognitive training was not associated with positive or negative effects in relation to any reported outcomes. The overall quality of the trials was low to moderate. The single RCT of cognitive rehabilitation found promising results in relation to a number of participant and caregiver outcomes, and was generally of high quality.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:

Available evidence regarding cognitive training remains limited, and the quality of the evidence needs to improve. However, there is still no indication of any significant benefit derived from cognitive training. Trial reports indicate that some gains resulting from intervention may not be captured adequately by available standardised outcome measures. The results of the single RCT of cognitive rehabilitation show promise but are preliminary in nature. Further, well-designed studies of cognitive training and cognitive rehabilitation are required to obtain more definitive evidence. Researchers should describe and classify their interventions appropriately using available terminology.

PMID:
23740535
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk