Why the study?
Evidence for the efficacy of cognitive training in patients with subcortical vascular cognitive impairment no dementia was lacking.
Does multidomain, adaptive, computerized cognitive training improve global cognitive function and executive function in patients with subcortical vascular cognitive impairment without dementia?
Does multidomain, adaptive, computerized cognitive training improve global cognitive function and executive function in patients with subcortical vascular cognitive impairment without dementia?
A 7-week computerized cognitive training program significantly improved global cognitive function and brain functional connectivity in patients with vascular cognitive impairment without dementia.
Supports multidomain computerized cognitive training in vascular cognitive impairment without dementia; extends RCT evidence for nonpharmacologic approaches.
Introduction Evidence for the efficacy of cognitive training in patients with subcortical vascular cognitive impairment no dementia is still lacking. Methods A randomized, active controlled design using multidomain, adaptive, computerized cognitive training for 30 minutes, 5 days/week for 7 weeks. Assessments included global cognitive function and executive function (primary outcomes) and brain functional connectivity and structural changes (secondary outcomes). Results Sixty patients were randomized across three medical centers in Beijing. At the end of the intervention, the cognitive training group showed significant improvement in Montreal Cognitive Assessment relative to the active control group ( P = .013) and significantly increased functional connectivity between the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and medial prefrontal cortex, which was significantly correlated with Montreal Cognitive Assessment change ( P = .017). Discussion Computerized cognitive training significantly improved global cognitive function, which was supported by the improved brain plasticity. Incorporation of biomarkers should be implemented in cognitive training trials.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tang et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: