EYE-TAR(AD+) is an observational study based on the same design as the princeps EYE-TAR(MA) study, but with a larger number of patients and including an additional evaluation of Facial emotion recognition (based on a more ecological material), in order to reinforce conclusions of the study EYE-TAR(MA) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.npg.2020.08.003. The main objective is to confirm that facial emotion recognition can be improved in AD using the "Training of Affect Recognition program" (TAR). The Secondary Objectives are to: Evaluate the impact of the "Training of Affect Recognition program" (TAR) on oculomotor behavior in a situation of social cognition, on behavioral disorders and on caregiver burden. Confirm that improvement in facial emotion recognition is related to modification of observation strategies. Confirm the link between improved recognition of facial emotions, reduced behavioral disorders and caregiver burden.
Study Type
OBSERVATIONAL
Enrollment
16
12 sessions in groups of 4 subject, over 6 weeks (2 sessions per week), using a rehabilitation program named Training of Affect Recognition (TAR).
12 sessions in groups of 4 subject, over 6 weeks (2 sessions per week), using classic cognitive stimulation workshops.
Centre Mémoire / Centre de Gérontologie Clinique Rainier III / Princess Grace Hospital
Monaco, Monaco
Facial emotion recognition (FER) performances
Change from Baseline and Comparison of FER performance between AD-TAR group and AD-Cognitive Stimulation group. Evaluation criteria: Scores to Ekman Faces task (1976). FER was assessed using pictures from the Ekman Faces task (1976), to test the recognition of the six facial basic emotions and neutral faces. There were four pictures per emotion, for a total of 28. For each picture, participants were asked to select one of the seven labels (anger, disgust, fear, sadness, happiness, surprise and neutral), with a maximum of 8 seconds of response time per picture.
Time frame: Baseline; Week 6; 1 month post intervention
Facial emotion recognition (FER) performances (dynamic set)
Change from Baseline and Comparison of FER performance between AD-TAR group and AD-Cognitive Stimulation group. Evaluation criteria: Scores to the Amsterdam Dynamic Facial Expression Set (ADFES). FER was assessed using pictures from the Amsterdam Dynamic Facial Expression Set (ADFES/ Van Der Schalk J, Hawk ST, Fischer AH, Doosje B. Moving faces, looking places: validation of the Amsterdam Dynamic Facial Expression Set (ADFES). Emotion. 2011;11(4):907-20.), to test the recognition of the six facial basic emotions and neutral faces. There were four pictures per emotion, for a total of 28. For each picture, participants were asked to select one of the seven labels (anger, disgust, fear, sadness, happiness, surprise and neutral), with a maximum of 8 seconds of response time per picture.
Time frame: Baseline; Week 6; 1 month post intervention
Facial emotion recognition (FER) performances - Response times
Change from Baseline and Comparison of FER performance between AD-TAR group and AD-Cognitive Stimulation group. Evaluation criteria: Response times to identify pictures from the Ekman Faces task (1976).
Time frame: Baseline; Week 6; 1 month post intervention
Facial emotion recognition (FER) performances - Response times (dynamic set)
Change from Baseline and Comparison of FER performance between AD-TAR group and AD-Cognitive Stimulation group. Evaluation criteria: Response time to identify dynamic expressions from the Amsterdam Dynamic Facial Expression Set (ADFES).
Time frame: Baseline; Week 6; 1 month post intervention
Eye movements behaviors during Facial emotion recognition (FER)
Change from Baseline and Comparison of gaze patterns between AD-TAR group and AD-Cognitive Stimulation group, during Facial emotion recognition tasks. Evaluation criteria: Eye movements (number of fixations on areas of interest) recorded with an eye-tracking device. FER was assessed using some pictures from the Ekman Faces task (1976).
Time frame: Baseline; Week 6; 1 month post intervention
Eye-Tracking Measurements during Facial emotion recognition (FER)
Change from Baseline and Comparison of gaze patterns between AD-TAR group and AD-Cognitive Stimulation group, during Facial emotion recognition tasks. Evaluation criteria: Eye movements (duration of fixations on areas of interest) recorded with an eye-tracking device. FER was assessed using some pictures from the Ekman Faces task (1976).
Time frame: Baseline; Week 6; 1 month post intervention
Eye gaze strategies during Facial emotion recognition (FER) (dynamic set)
Change from Baseline and Comparison of gaze patterns between AD-TAR group and AD-Cognitive Stimulation group, during Facial emotion recognition tasks. Evaluation criteria: Eye movements (timeline of eye fixations on areas of interest) recorded with a gaze recording device Tobii. FER was assessed using some pictures from the Amsterdam Dynamic Facial Expression Set (ADFES - 2011).
Time frame: Baseline; Week 6; 1 month post intervention
Behavioral disorders
Change from Baseline and Comparison between AD-TAR group and AD-Cognitive Stimulation group, Evaluation criteria: Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI), a scale that includes ten behavioral items (delusions, hallucinations, agitation, depression, anxiety, euphoria, apathy, disinhibition, irritability and aberrant motor behaviors) and two neurovegetative symptoms (sleep and appetite disorders). The evaluation was based on an interview with patients' primary caregivers. Both the frequency (/5) and the severity (/3) of each behavior were determined and a score was calculated by multiplying the frequency and the severity of each behavior observed during the last month.
Time frame: Baseline; Week 6; 1 month post intervention
The Family caregiver's burden
Change from Baseline and Comparison between AD-TAR group and AD-Cognitive Stimulation group, Evaluation criteria: The burden of the family caregiver was measured with the Zarit scale (completed by the caregiver). Composed of 22 questions on the physical, emotional and financial load felt. Total score /88.
Time frame: Baseline; Week 6; 1 month post intervention
Global cognitive performance
Change from Baseline and Comparison between AD-TAR group and AD-Cognitive Stimulation group, Evaluation criteria: MMSE (MINI MENTAL STATE EXAMINATION). 30-question general cognitive function assessment. The maximum score is 30.
Time frame: Baseline; Week 6; 1 month post intervention
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.