OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of mnemonic strategy training versus a matched-exposure control condition and to examine the relationship between training-related gains, neuropsychological abilities, and medial temporal lobe volumetrics in patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) and age-matched healthy controls. METHOD: Twenty-three of 45 screened healthy controls and 29 of 42 screened patients with aMCI were randomized to mnemonic strategy or matched-exposure groups. Groups were run in parallel, with participants blind to the other intervention. All participants completed five sessions within 2 weeks. Memory testing for object-location associations (OLAs) was performed during sessions one and five and at a 1-month follow-up. During Sessions 2-4, participants received either mnemonic strategy training or a matched number of exposures with corrective feedback for a total of 45 OLAs. Structural magnetic resonance imaging was performed in most participants, and medial temporal lobe volumetrics were acquired. RESULTS:Twenty-one healthy controls and 28 patients with aMCI were included in data analysis. Mnemonic strategy training was significantly more beneficial than matched exposure immediately after training, p = .006, partial η2 = .16, and at 1 month, p < .001, partial η2 = .35, regardless of diagnostic group (healthy group or aMCI group). Although patients with aMCI demonstrated gains comparable to the healthy control groups, their overall performance generally remained reduced. Mnemonic strategy-related improvement was correlated positively with baseline memory and executive functioning and negatively with inferior lateral ventricle volume in patients with aMCI; no significant relationships were evident in matched-exposure patients. CONCLUSION: Mnemonic strategies effectively improve memory for specific content for at least 1 month in patients with aMCI.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of mnemonic strategy training versus a matched-exposure control condition and to examine the relationship between training-related gains, neuropsychological abilities, and medial temporal lobe volumetrics in patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) and age-matched healthy controls. METHOD: Twenty-three of 45 screened healthy controls and 29 of 42 screened patients with aMCI were randomized to mnemonic strategy or matched-exposure groups. Groups were run in parallel, with participants blind to the other intervention. All participants completed five sessions within 2 weeks. Memory testing for object-location associations (OLAs) was performed during sessions one and five and at a 1-month follow-up. During Sessions 2-4, participants received either mnemonic strategy training or a matched number of exposures with corrective feedback for a total of 45 OLAs. Structural magnetic resonance imaging was performed in most participants, and medial temporal lobe volumetrics were acquired. RESULTS: Twenty-one healthy controls and 28 patients with aMCI were included in data analysis. Mnemonic strategy training was significantly more beneficial than matched exposure immediately after training, p = .006, partial η2 = .16, and at 1 month, p < .001, partial η2 = .35, regardless of diagnostic group (healthy group or aMCI group). Although patients with aMCI demonstrated gains comparable to the healthy control groups, their overall performance generally remained reduced. Mnemonic strategy-related improvement was correlated positively with baseline memory and executive functioning and negatively with inferior lateral ventricle volume in patients with aMCI; no significant relationships were evident in matched-exposure patients. CONCLUSION: Mnemonic strategies effectively improve memory for specific content for at least 1 month in patients with aMCI.
Authors: Martha L Daviglus; Carl C Bell; Wade Berrettini; Phyllis E Bowen; E Sander Connolly; Nancy Jean Cox; Jacqueline M Dunbar-Jacob; Evelyn C Granieri; Gail Hunt; Kathleen McGarry; Dinesh Patel; Arnold L Potosky; Elaine Sanders-Bush; Donald Silberberg; Maurizio Trevisan Journal: NIH Consens State Sci Statements Date: 2010-04-28
Authors: Sherry L Willis; Sharon L Tennstedt; Michael Marsiske; Karlene Ball; Jeffrey Elias; Kathy Mann Koepke; John N Morris; George W Rebok; Frederick W Unverzagt; Anne M Stoddard; Elizabeth Wright Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-12-20 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Benjamin M Hampstead; K Sathian; Anna Bacon Moore; Carrie Nalisnick; Anthony Y Stringer Journal: J Int Neuropsychol Soc Date: 2008-09 Impact factor: 2.892
Authors: Frederick W Unverzagt; Linda Kasten; Kathy E Johnson; George W Rebok; Michael Marsiske; Kathy Mann Koepke; Jeffrey W Elias; John N Morris; Sherry L Willis; Karlene Ball; Daniel F Rexroth; David M Smith; Fredric D Wolinsky; Sharon L Tennstedt Journal: J Int Neuropsychol Soc Date: 2007-11 Impact factor: 2.892
Authors: Kevin Duff; Joy D Humphreys Clark; Sid E O'Bryant; James W Mold; Randolph B Schiffer; Patricia B Sutker Journal: Arch Clin Neuropsychol Date: 2008-07-17 Impact factor: 2.813
Authors: Sharon S Simon; Benjamin M Hampstead; Mariana P Nucci; Fábio L S Duran; Luciana M Fonseca; Maria da Graça M Martin; Renata Ávila; Fábio H G Porto; Sônia M D Brucki; Camila B Martins; Lyssandra S Tascone; Edson Amaro; Geraldo F Busatto; Cássio M C Bottino Journal: Int J Psychophysiol Date: 2019-03-29 Impact factor: 2.997
Authors: Benjamin M Hampstead; Anthony Y Stringer; Randall F Stilla; Michelle Giddens; K Sathian Journal: Hippocampus Date: 2012-02-27 Impact factor: 3.899
Authors: Eliane C Miotto; Joana B Balardin; Maria da Graça M Martin; Guilherme V Polanczyk; Cary R Savage; Euripedes C Miguel; Marcelo C Batistuzzo Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-02-18 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Bruce Crosson; Benjamin M Hampstead; Lisa C Krishnamurthy; Venkatagiri Krishnamurthy; Keith M McGregor; Joe R Nocera; Simone Roberts; Amy D Rodriguez; Stella M Tran Journal: Neuropsychology Date: 2017-08-31 Impact factor: 3.295