Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-77ffc5d9c7-4ck9x Total loading time: 0.256 Render date: 2021-04-23T02:14:09.009Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }

455 - Face to face vs. online cognitive stimulation for people with cognitive impairment. A controlled trial

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 November 2020

Blanca Martínez-Martínez
Affiliation:
Occupational Therapist, Servicio Navarro de Salud, Pamplona, Spain.
Raquel Escudero-Bonet
Affiliation:
Occupational Therapist, Servicio Navarro de Salud, Pamplona, Spain.
J. Antonio Garcia-Casal
Affiliation:
Clinical Psychologist, Servicio Navarro de Salud, Pamplona, Spain.
Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Introduction

It's been proved that cognitive stimulation has direct effects over the improvement of general cognitive functions in people with cognitive impairment. People older than 50 are progressively familiar with computers and mobile devices, opening an opportunity for computer based online cognitive stimulation programmes.

Objectives

To compare the efficacy of face to face cognitive stimulation (FFCS) with online home delivered cognitive stimulation (OCS) regarding adherence, number of sessions, cognitive function and mood.

Patients and Methods

Participants were enrolled in a public memory clinic; 51 patients with cognitive decline were assigned to two groups: 27 received FFCS in a group format and 24 received OCS with the assistance of a carer. Both face to face and online interventions where designed and supervised by a trained Occupational Therapist. Pre and post assessments were carried out by a Clinical Psychologist with the Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE), the clock test, and the brief Geriatric Depression Scale. No differences were found between groups in age (69.65±9.74 years), cognitive function (MMSE=24.63±3.67), gender (55% women) and education. The treatment consisted of 32 sessions of CS held twice a week during 4 months.

Results

Data was analysed with nonparametric statistics and between group effect sizes were calculated. The FFCS participants completed 29.19 ± 1.73 sessions while the OCS group completed 26.00 ± 10.64 sessions (p < .000). All the participants in the FFCS group (100%) and 14 of the OCS group (58%) finished the treatment (p < .000).

Between group effect size favoured the FFCS intervention for MMSE (dc = 0.36). No between group differences were found for mood (dc = −0.5) or the clock test (dc = 0.13).

Conclusions

FFCS is better accepted by patients than OCS, with higher rates of adherence and less dropouts. FFCS leads to better results in the preservation of cognitive capacity.

Type
Abstract
Copyright
© International Psychogeriatric Association 2020

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 35 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 04th November 2020 - 23rd April 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

You have Access

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

455 - Face to face vs. online cognitive stimulation for people with cognitive impairment. A controlled trial
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

455 - Face to face vs. online cognitive stimulation for people with cognitive impairment. A controlled trial
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

455 - Face to face vs. online cognitive stimulation for people with cognitive impairment. A controlled trial
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *