Veterans have numerous risk factors (e.g., PTSD, TBI, cerebrovascular problems) for later-life cognitive and functional decline. Evidence supports the effectiveness of strategy-based cognitive rehabilitation therapies, including compensatory cognitive training (CCT), for such decline. However, questions remain about the length of time that CCT-driven improvements in cognitive and everyday function last, and whether additional 'booster' training sessions could provide additional benefit to aging Veterans who previously underwent treatment. This study examines the long-term durability of CCT in Veterans aged 55+ and provides an opportunity to develop and pilot test a series of CCT booster sessions that can be personalized toward individual everyday functional goals.
The RCT portion of this study is a pilot trial evaluating the feasibility and acceptability of a "booster" CCT intervention for individuals who have already previously participated in CCT. 28 Veterans who previously participated in the ME-CCT intervention group of the "Cognitive Rehabilitation for Older Veterans with Mild Cognitive Impairment" study \[PI: Twamley, VA CSRD: I01CX001592\] will be recruited to participate in this pilot RCT. All participants will receive an initial assessment that consists of neuropsychological and functional capacity tests, and will complete several self-reports of quality of life and daily function. Participants will complete questionnaires focused on acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility. Participants will then be randomized to pilot RCT booster training or Treatment as Usual (TAU) group, yielding approximately 14 participants in each group. Participants will receive either three to four booster intervention modules/sessions or treatment as usual. Directly following the approximately 4-week intervention window, all 28 participants will receive the same battery of tests and questionnaires they received at the beginning of the sub-study. Although the investigators will attempt to estimate possible initial effects of the CCT booster on cognitive and functional outcomes, the purpose of this pilot RCT is to examine feasibility and acceptability, not to complete an adequately-powered efficacy study.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
OTHER
Masking
SINGLE
Enrollment
28
ME-CCT is a traditionally a manualized group-based behavioral intervention (8 weeks, 2 hours per week) designed to improve cognitive and everyday functioning in patients with MCI. Our booster modules will be shortened and distilled from ME-CCT using the IM Adapt protocol (and thus will not be new information but rather 'reminder' content) for a personalized four-session sequence of booster training targeted toward specific everyday functional needs of individual participants.
Treatment for MCI is generally managed by Primary Care or Neurology. Participants will continue to receive their usual care with their current providers. With no effective pharmacological treatment known for persons with MCI, providers tend to focus on encouraging a healthy lifestyle, prevention and management of modifiable risk factors for cognitive impairment, and treatment of behavioral and psychiatric symptoms.
VA San Diego Healthcare System, San Diego, CA
San Diego, California, United States
"Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM)" questionnaire mean score
Four-item measure of perceived intervention implementation acceptability from Weiner et al., (2017) that has demonstrated strong psychometric properties. On a scale of 1-5 (completely disagree to completely agree), participants are asked to respond to the following: 1) implementation strategy meets my approval 2) implementation strategy is appealing to me 3) I like the implementation strategy 4) I welcome the implementation strategy. Average score of these four questions is calculated for measure score. Mean of participants' measure scores will be reported.
Time frame: 4 weeks
"Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM)" questionnaire mean score
Four-item measure of perceived intervention implementation appropriateness from Weiner et al., (2017) that has demonstrated strong psychometric properties. On a scale of 1-5 (completely disagree to completely agree), participants are asked to respond to the following: 1) implementation strategy seems fitting 2) implementation strategy seems suitable 3) implementation strategy seems applicable 4) implementation strategy seems like a good match. Average score of these four questions is calculated for measure score. Mean of participants' measure scores will be reported.
Time frame: 4 weeks
"Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM)" questionnaire mean score
Four-item measure of perceived intervention implementation feasibility from Weiner et al., (2017) that has demonstrated strong psychometric properties. On a scale of 1-5 (completely disagree to completely agree), participants are asked to respond to the following: 1) implementation strategy seems implementable 2) implementation strategy seems possible 3) implementation strategy seems doable 4) implementation strategy seems easy to use. Average score of these four questions is calculated for measure score. Mean of participants' measure scores will be reported.
Time frame: 4 weeks
Initial estimate of change in objective cognitive performance composite z score
Change in composite z score
Time frame: baseline, 4 weeks
Initial estimate of change in functional capacity performance composite z score
Change in composite z score
Time frame: baseline, 4 weeks
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.