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》。

IF 5.4 2区 心理学 Q1 NEUROSCIENCES
Neuropsychology Review Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2023-03-16 DOI:10.1007/s11065-023-09584-5
Chunchen Xiang, Yumei Zhang
{"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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

认知干预可分为认知训练(CT)、认知刺激(CS)、认知康复(CR)和联合干预(即认知干预与体育锻炼等其他非药物干预相结合)。然而,认知干预的有效性在不同的研究中差异很大,因此需要进行更全面的研究。我们旨在评估目前的证据是否表明认知干预能有效改善可能或疑似阿尔茨海默病患者的认知、神经精神症状、抑郁、生活质量和基本日常生活活动。我们确定了所有类型认知干预的随机对照试验,并将其纳入配对分析和网络荟萃分析。与对照干预相比,所有类型的认知干预在干预后对患有注意力缺失症的患者的整体认知能力都有中度和统计学意义上的显著改善(39 项研究,g = 0.43,95% CI:0.28 至 0.58,p < 0.01;Q = 102.27,df = 38,p < 0.01;I2 = 61.97%,τ2 = 0.13)。关于认知干预的具体类型,综合干预的累积排名曲线下表面值(SUCRA)最高(90.7%),其次是 CT(67.8%)、CS(53.4%),最后是 CR(28.9%)。认知干预对工作记忆、言语记忆、言语流畅性、对抗命名、注意力、神经精神症状、基本日常生活活动和生活质量也有显著效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Comparison of Cognitive Intervention Strategies for Individuals With Alzheimer's Disease: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Neuropsychology Review
Neuropsychology Review 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
1.70%
发文量
36
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.
×
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