Expectancy Does Not Predict 18-month Treatment Outcomes with Cognitive Training in Mild Cognitive Impairment.

IF 8.5 3区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
J N Motter, S N Rushia, M Qian, C Ndouli, A Nwosu, J R Petrella, P M Doraiswamy, T E Goldberg, D P Devanand
{"title":"Expectancy Does Not Predict 18-month Treatment Outcomes with Cognitive Training in Mild Cognitive Impairment.","authors":"J N Motter, S N Rushia, M Qian, C Ndouli, A Nwosu, J R Petrella, P M Doraiswamy, T E Goldberg, D P Devanand","doi":"10.14283/jpad.2023.62","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Computerized cognitive training (CCT) has emerged as a potential treatment option for mild cognitive impairment (MCI). It remains unclear whether CCT's effect is driven in part by expectancy of improvement.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to determine factors associated with therapeutic expectancy and the influence of therapeutic expectancy on treatment effects in a randomized clinical trial of CCT versus crossword puzzle training (CPT) for older adults with MCI.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Randomized clinical trial of CCT vs CPT with 78-week follow-up.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Two-site study - New York State Psychiatric Institute and Duke University Medical Center.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>107 patients with MCI.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>12 weeks of intensive training with CCT or CPT with follow-up booster training over 78 weeks.</p><p><strong>Measurements: </strong>Patients rated their expectancies for CCT and CPT prior to randomization.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patients reported greater expectancy for CCT than CPT. Lower patient expectancy was associated with lower global cognition at baseline and older age. Expectancy did not differ by sex or race. There was no association between expectancy and measures of everyday functioning, hippocampus volume, or apolipoprotein E genotype. Expectancy was not associated with change in measures of global cognition, everyday functioning, and hippocampus volume from baseline to week 78, nor did expectancy interact with treatment condition.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While greater cognitive impairment and increased age was associated with low expectancy of improvement, expectancy was not associated with the likelihood of response to treatment with CPT or CCT.</p>","PeriodicalId":48606,"journal":{"name":"Jpad-Journal of Prevention of Alzheimers Disease","volume":"1 1","pages":"71-78"},"PeriodicalIF":8.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10794849/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jpad-Journal of Prevention of Alzheimers Disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14283/jpad.2023.62","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Computerized cognitive training (CCT) has emerged as a potential treatment option for mild cognitive impairment (MCI). It remains unclear whether CCT's effect is driven in part by expectancy of improvement.

Objectives: This study aimed to determine factors associated with therapeutic expectancy and the influence of therapeutic expectancy on treatment effects in a randomized clinical trial of CCT versus crossword puzzle training (CPT) for older adults with MCI.

Design: Randomized clinical trial of CCT vs CPT with 78-week follow-up.

Setting: Two-site study - New York State Psychiatric Institute and Duke University Medical Center.

Participants: 107 patients with MCI.

Intervention: 12 weeks of intensive training with CCT or CPT with follow-up booster training over 78 weeks.

Measurements: Patients rated their expectancies for CCT and CPT prior to randomization.

Results: Patients reported greater expectancy for CCT than CPT. Lower patient expectancy was associated with lower global cognition at baseline and older age. Expectancy did not differ by sex or race. There was no association between expectancy and measures of everyday functioning, hippocampus volume, or apolipoprotein E genotype. Expectancy was not associated with change in measures of global cognition, everyday functioning, and hippocampus volume from baseline to week 78, nor did expectancy interact with treatment condition.

Conclusions: While greater cognitive impairment and increased age was associated with low expectancy of improvement, expectancy was not associated with the likelihood of response to treatment with CPT or CCT.

Abstract Image

期望值无法预测轻度认知障碍患者接受认知训练后 18 个月的治疗效果。
背景:计算机化认知训练(CCT)已成为轻度认知障碍(MCI)的一种潜在治疗方法。目前仍不清楚 CCT 的疗效是否部分受预期改善的驱动:本研究旨在确定与治疗预期相关的因素,以及治疗预期对治疗效果的影响,该研究是针对患有 MCI 的老年人进行的 CCT 与填字游戏训练(CPT)的随机临床试验:设计:CCT 与 CPT 随机临床试验,随访 78 周:研究地点:两地研究--纽约州精神病研究所和杜克大学医学中心:107 名 MCI 患者:干预措施:12 周的 CCT 或 CPT 强化训练,78 周的后续强化训练:患者在随机分配前对CCT和CPT的期望值进行评分:结果:患者对 CCT 的期望值高于 CPT。患者的期望值较低与基线时的整体认知能力较低和年龄较大有关。不同性别或种族的患者期望值没有差异。期望值与日常功能、海马体积或载脂蛋白 E 基因型之间没有关联。从基线到第78周,期望值与总体认知、日常功能和海马体体积的变化无关,期望值与治疗条件也没有相互作用:虽然认知障碍加重和年龄增大与低预期改善有关,但预期与CPT或CCT治疗反应的可能性无关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
7.80%
发文量
85
期刊介绍: The JPAD « Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer’Disease » will publish reviews, original research articles and short reports to improve our knowledge in the field of Alzheimer prevention including : neurosciences, biomarkers, imaging, epidemiology, public health, physical cognitive exercise, nutrition, risk and protective factors, drug development, trials design, and heath economic outcomes. JPAD will publish also the meeting abstracts from Clinical Trial on Alzheimer Disease (CTAD) and will be distributed both in paper and online version worldwide.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信