Evidence-Based Cognitive Rehabilitation: Updated Review of the Literature From 2003 Through 2008

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

To update our clinical recommendations for cognitive rehabilitation of people with traumatic brain injury (TBI) and stroke, based on a systematic review of the literature from 2003 through 2008. PubMed and Infotrieve literature searches were conducted using the terms attention, awareness, cognitive, communication, executive, language, memory, perception, problem solving, and/or reasoning combined with each of the following terms: rehabilitation, remediation, and training for articles published between 2003 and 2008. The task force initially identified citations for 198 published articles. One hundred forty-one articles were selected for inclusion after our initial screening. Twenty-nine studies were excluded after further detailed review. Excluded articles included 4 descriptive studies without data, 6 nontreatment studies, 7 experimental manipulations, 6 reviews, 1 single case study not related to TBI or stroke, 2 articles where the intervention was provided to caretakers, 1 article redacted by the journal, and 2 reanalyses of prior publications. We fully reviewed and evaluated 112 studies. Articles were assigned to 1 of 6 categories reflecting the primary area of intervention: attention; vision and visuospatial functioning; language and communication skills; memory; executive functioning, problem solving and awareness; and comprehensive-holistic cognitive rehabilitation. Articles were abstracted and levels of evidence determined using specific criteria. Of the 112 studies, 14 were rated as class I, 5 as class Ia, 11 as class II, and 82 as class III. Evidence within each area of intervention was synthesized and recommendations for Practice Standards, Practice Guidelines, and Practice Options were made. There is substantial evidence to support interventions for attention, memory, social communication skills, executive function, and for comprehensive-holistic neuropsychologic rehabilitation after TBI. Evidence supports visuospatial rehabilitation after right hemisphere stroke, and interventions for aphasia and apraxia after left hemisphere stroke. Together with our prior reviews, we have evaluated a total of 370 interventions, including 65 class I or Ia studies. There is now sufficient information to support evidence-based protocols and implement empirically-supported treatments for cognitive disability after TBI and stroke. Copyright © 2011 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Related collections

Most cited references 131

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Evidence-based cognitive rehabilitation: updated review of the literature from 1998 through 2002.

Keith Cicerone, Cynthia Dahlberg, James Malec … (2005)

To update the previous evidence-based recommendations of the Brain Injury Interdisciplinary Special Interest Group of the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine for cognitive rehabilitation of people with traumatic brain injury (TBI) and stroke, based on a systematic review of the literature from 1998 through 2002. PubMed and Infotrieve literature searches were conducted using the terms attention, awareness, cognition, communication, executive, language, memory, perception, problem solving, and reasoning combined with each of the terms rehabilitation, remediation, and training. Reference lists from identified articles were reviewed and a bibliography listing 312 articles was compiled. One hundred eighteen articles were initially selected for inclusion. Thirty-one studies were excluded after detailed review. Excluded articles included 14 studies without data, 6 duplicate publications or follow-up studies, 5 nontreatment studies, 4 reviews, and 2 case studies involving diagnoses other than TBI or stroke. Articles were assigned to 1 of 7 categories reflecting the primary area of intervention: attention; visual perception; apraxia; language and communication; memory; executive functioning, problem solving and awareness; and comprehensive-holistic cognitive rehabilitation. Articles were abstracted and levels of evidence determined using specific criteria. Of the 87 studies evaluated, 17 were rated as class I, 8 as class II, and 62 as class III. Evidence within each area of intervention was synthesized and recommendations for practice standards, practice guidelines, and practice options were made. There is substantial evidence to support cognitive-linguistic therapies for people with language deficits after left hemisphere stroke. New evidence supports training for apraxia after left hemisphere stroke. The evidence supports visuospatial rehabilitation for deficits associated with visual neglect after right hemisphere stroke. There is substantial evidence to support cognitive rehabilitation for people with TBI, including strategy training for mild memory impairment, strategy training for postacute attention deficits, and interventions for functional communication deficits. The overall analysis of 47 treatment comparisons, based on class I studies included in the current and previous review, reveals a differential benefit in favor of cognitive rehabilitation in 37 of 47 (78.7%) comparisons, with no comparison demonstrating a benefit in favor of the alternative treatment condition. Future research should move beyond the simple question of whether cognitive rehabilitation is effective, and examine the therapy factors and patient characteristics that optimize the clinical outcomes of cognitive rehabilitation.

0 comments Cited 177 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Computerized working memory training after stroke--a pilot study.

T. Hirvikoski, H Jacobaeus, T Klingberg … (2007)

To examine the effects of working memory (WM) training in adult patients with stroke. A randomized pilot study with a treatment group and a passive control group; 18 participants (12 males) in a vocational age group (mean age 54 years) were randomized to either the treatment or the control condition. The intervention consisted of computerized training on various WM tasks for five weeks. A neuropsychological test battery and self-rating on cognitive functioning in daily life (the CFQ) were administered both before and after the treatment. Statistically significant training effects were found on the non-trained tests for WM and attention, i.e., tests that measure related cognitive functions but are not identical to tasks in the training programme (Span board p < 0.05; PASAT p < 0.001; Ruff 2&7 p < 0.005). There was a significant decrease in symptoms of cognitive problems as measured by the CFQ (p < 0.005). More than one year after a stroke, systematic WM training can significantly improve WM and attention.

0 comments Cited 109 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Evidence-based cognitive rehabilitation: recommendations for clinical practice.

P A Morse, K D Cicerone, C Dahlberg … (2000)

To establish evidence-based recommendations for the clinical practice of cognitive rehabilitation, derived from a methodical review of the scientific literature concerning the effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation for persons with traumatic brain injury (TBI) or stroke. A MEDLINE literature search using combinations of these key words as search terms: attention, awareness, cognition, communication, executive, language, memory, perception, problem solving, reasoning, rehabilitation, remediation, and training. Reference lists from identified articles also were reviewed; a total bibliography of 655 published articles was compiled. Studies were initially reviewed according to the following exclusion criteria: nonintervention studies; theoretical, descriptive, or review papers; papers without adequate specification of interventions; subjects other than persons with TBI or stroke; pediatric subjects; pharmacologic interventions; and non-English language papers. After screening, 232 articles were eligible for inclusion. After detailed review, 61 of these were excluded as single case reports without data, subjects other than TBI and stroke, and nontreatment studies. This screening yielded 171 articles to be evaluated. Articles were assigned to 1 of 7 categories according to their primary area of intervention: attention, visual perception and constructional abilities, language and communication, memory, problem solving and executive functioning, multi-modal interventions, and comprehensive-holistic cognitive rehabilitation. All articles were independently reviewed by at least 2 committee members and abstracted according to specified criteria. The 171 studies that passed initial review were classified according to the strength of their methods. Class I studies were defined as prospective, randomized controlled trials. Class II studies were defined as prospective cohort studies, retrospective case-control studies, or clinical series with well-designed controls. Class III studies were defined as clinical series without concurrent controls, or studies with appropriate single-subject methodology. Of the 171 studies evaluated, 29 were rated as Class I, 35 as Class II, and 107 as Class III. The overall evidence within each predefined area of intervention was then synthesized and recommendations were derived based on consideration of the relative strengths of the evidence. The resulting practice parameters were organized into 3 types of recommendations: Practice Standards, Practice Guidelines, and Practice Options. Overall, support exists for the effectiveness of several forms of cognitive rehabilitation for persons with stroke and TBI. Specific recommendations can be made for remediation of language and perception after left and right hemisphere stroke, respectively, and for the remediation of attention, memory, functional communication, and executive functioning after TBI. These recommendations may help to establish parameters of effective treatment, which should be of assistance to practicing clinicians.