Cognitive stimulation for portuguese older adults with cognitive impairment: a randomized controlled trial of efficacy, comparative duration, feasibility and experiential relevance

Although some studies point to cognitive stimulation as a beneficial therapy for older adults with cognitive impairments, this area of research and practice is still lacking dissemination and is underrepresented in many countries. Moreover, the comparative effects of different intervention durations remain to be established and, besides cognitive effects, pragmatic parameters, such as cost-effectiveness and experiential relevance to participants, are seldom explored. In this work, we present a randomized con- trolled wait-list trial evaluating 2 different intervention durations (standard 1⁄4 17 vs brief 1⁄4 11 sessions) of a cognitive stimulation program developed for older adults with cognitive impairments with or without dementia. 20 participants were randomly assigned to the standard duration intervention program (17 sessions, 1.5 months) or to a wait-list group. At postintervention of the standard intervention group, the wait-list group crossed over to receive the brief intervention program (11 sessions, 1 month). Changes in neuropsychological, functionality, quality of life, and caregiver outcomes were evaluated. Experience during intervention and costs and feasibility were also evaluated. The current cognitive stimulation programs (ie, standard and brief) showed high values of experiential relevance for both intervention durations. High adherence, completion rates, and reasonable costs were found for both formats. Further studies are needed to definitively establish the potential efficacy, optimal duration, cost-effectiveness, and experiential relevance for participants of cognitive intervention approaches.

Are cognitive interventions for multiple sclerosis effective and feasible?

Purpose: Fifty percent of patients with Multiple Sclerosis (MS) are estimated to have cognitive impairments leading to considerable decline in productivity and quality of life. Cognitive intervention has been considered to complement pharmacological treatments. However, a lack of agreement concerning the efficacy of cognitive interventions in MS still exists. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to assess the effects of cognitive interventions in MS. Methods: To overcome limitations of previous meta-analyses, several databases were searched only for Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) with low risk of bias. Results: Five studies (total of 139 participants) met our eligibility criteria. Although good completion and adherence rates were evident, we found no evidence of intervention effects on cognition or mood in post-intervention or follow-up assessments. Conclusions: This is the first meta-analysis assessing the effects of cognitive intervention in MS including only RCTs with comparable conditions. Research regarding efficacy, cost-effectiveness and feasibility is still in its infancy. Caution is advised when interpreting these results due to the small number of RCTs meeting the inclusion criteria. Considering the costs of disease, good completion and adherence rates of this approach, further research is warranted. Recommendations concerning improved research practices in the field are presented as well.