| Literature DB >> 28866988 |
C Reeder1, V Huddy2, M Cella1, R Taylor1, K Greenwood3, S Landau1, T Wykes1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cognitive remediation (CR) is a psychological therapy, which improves cognitive and social functioning in people with schizophrenia. It is now being implemented within routine clinical services and mechanisms of change are being explored. We designed a new generation computerised CR programme, CIRCuiTS (Computerised Interactive Remediation of Cognition - a Training for Schizophrenia), to enhance strategic and metacognitive processing, with an integrated focus on the transfer of cognitive skills to daily living. This large trial tested its feasibility to be delivered in therapist-led and independent sessions, and its efficacy for improved cognitive and social functioning.Entities:
Keywords: Schizophrenia; cognition; cognitive remediation; metacognition; neuropsychology; psychosis; social functioning
Year: 2017 PMID: 28866988 PMCID: PMC5647677 DOI: 10.1017/S0033291717001234
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Psychol Med ISSN: 0033-2917 Impact factor: 7.723
Mediation of CR effects on time spend in structured activities at 12 weeks by primary cognitive outcomes (n = 87)
| Putative mediator | Estimated total effect of CR on
functioning (TAU-CR) [95% CI] | Estimated effect of CR on mediator (TAU-CR) [95% CI] | Estimated effect of mediator on
functioning (per baseline | Direct (non-mediated) effect of CR on
functioning (TAU-CR) [95% CI] | Indirect (mediated) effect of CR on
functioning (TAU-CR) [95% CI] | % mediated |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Verbal working memory (Digit span) | −0.58 [−0.96 to −0.21] | −0.18 [−0.44 to 0.09] | −0.11 [−0.43 to 0.20] | −0.60 [−0.98 to −0.23] | 0.02 [−0.05 to 0.10] ( | n.a. |
| Visual memory (ROCF) | −0.58 [−0.95 to −0.21] | −0.35 [−0.61 to −0.10] | −0.05 [−0.38 to 0.28] | −0.60 [−0.99 to −0.21] | 0.02 [−0.08 to 0.19] ( | n.a. |
| Verbal executive function (Hayling) | −0.57 [−0.94 to −0.17] | −0.08 [−0.39 to 0.23] | 0.16 [−0.11 to 0.43] | −0.56 [−0.93 to −0.18] | −0.01 [−0.16 to 0.02] ( | 2.3% |
| Visual executive function (WCST) | −0.53 [−0.91 to −0.15] | 0.37 [−0.01 to 0.75] | −0.28 [−0.51 to −0.06] | −0.43 [−0.80 to −0.05] | −0.11 [−0.31 to −0.01] ( | 19.8% |
Time spend in structured activities was ln-transformed and then standardised to express functioning in units of baseline standard deviations (s.d.s).
Confidence interval for direct effect is bias corrected bootstrap interval (using 1000 bootstrap replicates) as recommended in (MacKinnon & Valente, 2014).
Sobel test for zero mediation.
Not applicable when the direct and indirect CR effect point in different directions.
Fig. 1.Consort diagram.
Participant characteristics
| Characteristic | Complete sample
( | Group receiving CIRCuiTS
( | Group not receiving CIRCuiTS
( |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 38.3 years (10.4 years) | 38.7 years (10.1 years) | 37.9 years (10.9 years) |
| Gender | |||
| Women | 33 (35.5%) | 14 (30.4%) | 19 (40.4%) |
| Men | 60 (64.5%) | 32 (69.6%) | 28 (59.6%) |
| Years in education | 13.2 years (2.5 years) | 13.5 years (2.6 years) | 13.0 years (2.4 years) |
| Marital status | |||
| Single | 77 (82.8%) | 39 (84.8%) | 38 (80.9%) |
| Married | 7 (7.5%) | 3 (6.5%) | 4 (8.5%) |
| Separated/divorced | 9 (9.7%) | 4 (8.7%) | 5 (10.6%) |
| Estimated premorbid IQ | 93.5 (10.8) | 94.2 (10.5) | 92.8 (11.2) |
| Current employment | |||
| Paid or self employment | 6 (6.5%) | 3 (6.5%) | 3 (6.4%) |
| Voluntary employment | 16 (17.2%) | 6 (13.0%) | 10 (21.3%) |
| Unemployed | 58 (62.3%) | 29 (63.0%) | 29 (61.7%) |
| Student | 10 (10.8%) | 6 (13.0%) | 4 (8.5%) |
| Domestic responsibilities | 2 (2.1%) | 1 (2.2%) | 1 (2.1%) |
| Other | 1 (1.1%) | 1 (2.2%) | 0 (0.0%) |
| Current accommodation | |||
| Independent accommodation | 52 (55.9%) | 23 (50.1%) | 29 (61.7%) |
| Staffed accommodation | 24 (25.8%) | 14 (30.4%) | 10 (21.2%) |
| Unstaffed group accommodation | 3 (3.2%) | 1 (2.2%) | 2 (4.3%) |
| Acute psychiatric ward | 1 (1.1%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (2.1%) |
| Rehabiliation psychiatric ward | 13 (14.0%) | 8 (17.4%) | 5 (10.6%) |
| Time since first psychiatric contact | |||
| Less than 1 year | 4 (4.3%) | 1 (2.2%) | 3 (6.4%) |
| 1–5 years | 16 (17.2%) | 8 (17.4%) | 8 (17.0%) |
| 5–10 years | 19 (20.4%) | 4 (8.7%) | 15 (31.9%) |
| More than 10 years | 54 (58.1%) | 33 (71.7%) | 21 (44.7%) |
| Ethnicity | |||
| White | 23 (24.7%) | 13 (28.3%) | 10 (21.3%) |
| Black | 54 (58.1%) | 25 (54.3%) | 29 (61.7%) |
| Asian | 6 (6.5%) | 2 (4.3%) | 4 (8.5%) |
| Mixed race | 10 (10.8%) | 6 (13.0%) | 4 (8.5%) |
| PANSS | |||
| Positive | 8.5 (4.5) | 8.3 (4.2) | 8.7 (4.8) |
| Negative | 10.8 (4.9) | 11.2 (5.2) | 10.5 (4.6) |
| Disorganised | 8.0 (3.0) | 8.1 (3.3) | 8.0 (2.6) |
| Excited | 5.3 (1.8) | 5.4 (2.1) | 5.1 (1.6) |
| Depressed | 6.9 (3.2) | 6.9 (3.3) | 6.8 (3.1) |
| Medication | |||
| Typical anti-psychotics | 9 (9.7%) | 4 (8.7%) | 5 (10.6%) |
| Atypical anti-psychotics | 82 (88.2%) | 42 (91.3%) | 43 (91.5%) |
| Risperidone | 17 (18.3%) | 9 (19.6%) | 8 (17.0%) |
| Olanzapine | 18 (19.4%) | 9 (19.6%) | 9 (19.1%) |
| Clozapine | 30 (32.3%) | 14 (30.4%) | 16 (34.0%) |
| Chlorpromazine equivalent dosage | Median 333.3 mg (0–1920.0 mg) | Median 326.6 mg (0–1920.0 mg) | Median 377.5 mg (43.8–1800.0 mg) |
Estimated treatment group effects at 12 and 26 weeks post randomisation
| 12 weeks | 26 weeks | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Outcome | Estimated difference (TAU-CR) [95% CI] Stand. effect size | Estimated difference (TAU-CR) [95% CI] Stand. effect size | ||
|
| ||||
| Verbal working memory (Digit span) | −1.19 ( | −0.564 [−1.494 to 0.366] ES = −0.16 | −0.99 ( | −0.474 [−1.417 to 0.464] ES = −0.13 |
| Visual memory (ROCF) | −2.63 ( | −2.403 [−4.194 to −0.611] ES = −0.35 | −3.46 ( | −3.166 [−4.957 to −1.374] ES = −0.46 |
| Verbal executive function (Hayling) | −0.65 ( | −0.421 [−1.699 to 0.857] ES = −0.09 | −0.83 ( | −0.545 [−1.839 to 0.749] ES = −0.12 |
| Visual executive function (WCST) | 1.91 ( | 6.531 [−0.176 to 13.237] ES = 0.36 | 1.66 ( | 5.713 [−1.046 to 12.473] ES = 0.32 |
|
| ||||
| Time spend in structured activities | −3.01 ( | 0.622 | −0.42 ( | 0.936 |
| Positive symptoms | 1.97 ( | 1.129 | 0.26 ( | 1.016 |
| Negative symptoms | −0.21 ( | 0.986 | 0.47 ( | 1.031 |
| Disorganised symptoms | 1.28 ( | 1.073 | 1.81 ( | 1.106 |
Outcome was analysed on the ln-scale due to positive skewness. Unstandardised effect estimates represent multiplicative (factor) effects and need to be compared with the factor value ‘1’ (=no group effect).