{"title":"阿尔茨海默氏症患者认知干预策略的比较:系统回顾与网络元分析》。","authors":"Chunchen Xiang, Yumei Zhang","doi":"10.1007/s11065-023-09584-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Accumulating evidence has shown the effectiveness of cognitive interventions, which can be divided into cognitive training (CT), cognitive stimulation (CS), cognitive rehabilitation (CR), and combined interventions (i.e., cognitive interventions combined with other non-pharmacological interventions such as physical exercise), in individuals with Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, the effectiveness of cognitive interventions varies greatly among studies and more comprehensive studies are required. We aimed to evaluate whether the current evidence shows that cognitive interventions are effective at improving cognition, neuropsychiatric symptoms, depression, quality of life, and basic activities of daily living among individuals with possible or probable AD. Randomized controlled trials of all types of cognitive intervention were identified for inclusion in pairwise and network meta-analyses. There was a moderate and statistically significant post-intervention improvement in global cognition among individuals with AD for all types of cognitive intervention compared to control interventions (39 studies, g = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.58, p < 0.01; Q = 102.27, df = 38, p < 0.01; I<sup>2</sup> = 61.97%, τ<sup>2</sup> = 0.13). Regarding the specific types of cognitive intervention, combined interventions had the highest surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value (90.7%), followed by CT (67.8%), CS (53.4%), and lastly CR (28.9%). Significant effects of cognitive interventions were also found for working memory, verbal memory, verbal fluency, confrontation naming, attention, neuropsychiatric symptoms, basic activities of daily living, and quality of life.</p>","PeriodicalId":49754,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology Review","volume":" ","pages":"402-416"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11166762/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Cognitive Intervention Strategies for Individuals With Alzheimer's Disease: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Chunchen Xiang, Yumei Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11065-023-09584-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Accumulating evidence has shown the effectiveness of cognitive interventions, which can be divided into cognitive training (CT), cognitive stimulation (CS), cognitive rehabilitation (CR), and combined interventions (i.e., cognitive interventions combined with other non-pharmacological interventions such as physical exercise), in individuals with Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, the effectiveness of cognitive interventions varies greatly among studies and more comprehensive studies are required. We aimed to evaluate whether the current evidence shows that cognitive interventions are effective at improving cognition, neuropsychiatric symptoms, depression, quality of life, and basic activities of daily living among individuals with possible or probable AD. Randomized controlled trials of all types of cognitive intervention were identified for inclusion in pairwise and network meta-analyses. There was a moderate and statistically significant post-intervention improvement in global cognition among individuals with AD for all types of cognitive intervention compared to control interventions (39 studies, g = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.58, p < 0.01; Q = 102.27, df = 38, p < 0.01; I<sup>2</sup> = 61.97%, τ<sup>2</sup> = 0.13). Regarding the specific types of cognitive intervention, combined interventions had the highest surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value (90.7%), followed by CT (67.8%), CS (53.4%), and lastly CR (28.9%). Significant effects of cognitive interventions were also found for working memory, verbal memory, verbal fluency, confrontation naming, attention, neuropsychiatric symptoms, basic activities of daily living, and quality of life.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49754,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neuropsychology Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"402-416\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11166762/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neuropsychology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-023-09584-5\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/3/16 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuropsychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-023-09584-5","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/3/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of Cognitive Intervention Strategies for Individuals With Alzheimer's Disease: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.
Accumulating evidence has shown the effectiveness of cognitive interventions, which can be divided into cognitive training (CT), cognitive stimulation (CS), cognitive rehabilitation (CR), and combined interventions (i.e., cognitive interventions combined with other non-pharmacological interventions such as physical exercise), in individuals with Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, the effectiveness of cognitive interventions varies greatly among studies and more comprehensive studies are required. We aimed to evaluate whether the current evidence shows that cognitive interventions are effective at improving cognition, neuropsychiatric symptoms, depression, quality of life, and basic activities of daily living among individuals with possible or probable AD. Randomized controlled trials of all types of cognitive intervention were identified for inclusion in pairwise and network meta-analyses. There was a moderate and statistically significant post-intervention improvement in global cognition among individuals with AD for all types of cognitive intervention compared to control interventions (39 studies, g = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.58, p < 0.01; Q = 102.27, df = 38, p < 0.01; I2 = 61.97%, τ2 = 0.13). Regarding the specific types of cognitive intervention, combined interventions had the highest surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value (90.7%), followed by CT (67.8%), CS (53.4%), and lastly CR (28.9%). Significant effects of cognitive interventions were also found for working memory, verbal memory, verbal fluency, confrontation naming, attention, neuropsychiatric symptoms, basic activities of daily living, and quality of life.
期刊介绍:
Neuropsychology Review is a quarterly, refereed publication devoted to integrative review papers on substantive content areas in neuropsychology, with particular focus on populations with endogenous or acquired conditions affecting brain and function and on translational research providing a mechanistic understanding of clinical problems. Publication of new data is not the purview of the journal. Articles are written by international specialists in the field, discussing such complex issues as distinctive functional features of central nervous system disease and injury; challenges in early diagnosis; the impact of genes and environment on function; risk factors for functional impairment; treatment efficacy of neuropsychological rehabilitation; the role of neuroimaging, neuroelectrophysiology, and other neurometric modalities in explicating function; clinical trial design; neuropsychological function and its substrates characteristic of normal development and aging; and neuropsychological dysfunction and its substrates in neurological, psychiatric, and medical conditions. The journal''s broad perspective is supported by an outstanding, multidisciplinary editorial review board guided by the aim to provide students and professionals, clinicians and researchers with scholarly articles that critically and objectively summarize and synthesize the strengths and weaknesses in the literature and propose novel hypotheses, methods of analysis, and links to other fields.