Blake J Lawrence1, Natalie Gasson1, Romola S Bucks2, Lakkhina Troeung2,3, Andrea M Loftus1. 1. 1 Curtin University, Bentley, Western Australia, Australia. 2. 2 The University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia. 3. 3 The University of Notre Dame Australia, Fremantle, Western Australia, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many people with Parkinson's disease (PD) experience cognitive decline. It is not known whether cognitive training or noninvasive brain stimulation are effective at alleviating cognitive deficits in PD. OBJECTIVE: To examine cognitive training and non-invasive brain stimulation interventions for cognition in PD. METHODS: An extensive search was conducted of published and unpublished studies in online databases. Studies were selected if they were controlled trials examining standard (not individualized) or tailored (individualized) cognitive training, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), or transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in PD, with outcomes measured by standardized neuropsychological tests. RESULTS: Fourteen controlled trials met inclusion criteria. For executive function, the pooled effect size (Hedges' g) for cognitive training (standard and tailored combined) was small ( g = 0.42) but statistically significant (95% CI 0.15-0.68). The pooled effect for standard cognitive training (alone) was medium ( g = 0.51) and significant (95% CI 0.16-0.85). For attention/working memory, small pooled effect sizes were found when combining standard and tailored cognitive training ( g = 0.23; 95% CI 0.02-0.44) and for standard cognitive training alone ( g = 0.29; 95% CI 0.04-0.53), both significant. For memory, small but significant pooled effect sizes were also found when combining standard and tailored cognitive training and for standard cognitive training alone. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that standard and tailored cognitive training may improve executive function, attention/working memory, and memory in PD. Future studies must adopt randomized controlled trial designs to explore the therapeutic potential of these interventions.
BACKGROUND: Many people with Parkinson's disease (PD) experience cognitive decline. It is not known whether cognitive training or noninvasive brain stimulation are effective at alleviating cognitive deficits in PD. OBJECTIVE: To examine cognitive training and non-invasive brain stimulation interventions for cognition in PD. METHODS: An extensive search was conducted of published and unpublished studies in online databases. Studies were selected if they were controlled trials examining standard (not individualized) or tailored (individualized) cognitive training, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), or transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in PD, with outcomes measured by standardized neuropsychological tests. RESULTS: Fourteen controlled trials met inclusion criteria. For executive function, the pooled effect size (Hedges' g) for cognitive training (standard and tailored combined) was small ( g = 0.42) but statistically significant (95% CI 0.15-0.68). The pooled effect for standard cognitive training (alone) was medium ( g = 0.51) and significant (95% CI 0.16-0.85). For attention/working memory, small pooled effect sizes were found when combining standard and tailored cognitive training ( g = 0.23; 95% CI 0.02-0.44) and for standard cognitive training alone ( g = 0.29; 95% CI 0.04-0.53), both significant. For memory, small but significant pooled effect sizes were also found when combining standard and tailored cognitive training and for standard cognitive training alone. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that standard and tailored cognitive training may improve executive function, attention/working memory, and memory in PD. Future studies must adopt randomized controlled trial designs to explore the therapeutic potential of these interventions.
Authors: Dag Aarsland; Lucia Batzu; Glenda M Halliday; Gert J Geurtsen; Clive Ballard; K Ray Chaudhuri; Daniel Weintraub Journal: Nat Rev Dis Primers Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 52.329
Authors: Blake J Lawrence; Dona M P Jayakody; Helen Henshaw; Melanie A Ferguson; Robert H Eikelboom; Andrea M Loftus; Peter L Friedland Journal: Trends Hear Date: 2018 Jan-Dec Impact factor: 3.293
Authors: Qiang Zhang; Georgina M Aldridge; Nandakumar S Narayanan; Steven W Anderson; Ergun Y Uc Journal: Neurotherapeutics Date: 2020-11-17 Impact factor: 6.088
Authors: Hanna Malmberg Gavelin; Amit Lampit; Harry Hallock; Julieta Sabatés; Alex Bahar-Fuchs Journal: Neuropsychol Rev Date: 2020-04-07 Impact factor: 7.444