| Literature DB >> 29322428 |
Sophie D van der Linden1,2, Margriet M Sitskoorn3, Geert-Jan M Rutten4, Karin Gehring4,3.
Abstract
Many patients with primary brain tumors experience cognitive deficits. Cognitive rehabilitation programs focus on alleviating these deficits, but availability of such programs is limited. Our large randomized controlled trial (RCT) demonstrated positive effects of the cognitive rehabilitation program developed by our group. We converted the program into the iPad-based cognitive rehabilitation program ReMind, to increase its accessibility. The app incorporates psychoeducation, strategy training and retraining. This pilot study in patients with primary brain tumors evaluates the feasibility of the use of the ReMind-app in a clinical (research) setting in terms of accrual, attrition, adherence and patient satisfaction. The intervention commenced 3 months after resective surgery and patients were advised to spend 3 h per week on the program for 10 weeks. Of 28 eligible patients, 15 patients with presumed low-grade glioma or meningioma provided informed consent. Most important reason for decline was that patients (7) experienced no cognitive complaints. Participants completed on average 71% of the strategy training and 76% of the retraining. Some patients evaluated the retraining as too easy. Overall, 85% of the patients evaluated the intervention as "good" or "excellent". All patients indicated that they would recommend the program to other patients with brain tumors. The ReMind-app is the first evidence-based cognitive telerehabilitation program for adult patients with brain tumors and this pilot study suggests that postoperative cognitive rehabilitation via this app is feasible. Based on patients' feedback, we have expanded the retraining with more difficult exercises. We will evaluate the efficacy of ReMind in an RCT.Entities:
Keywords: Cognitive rehabilitation; Glioma; Meningioma; Neurosurgery; Telerehabilitation; eHealth
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29322428 PMCID: PMC5920011 DOI: 10.1007/s11060-017-2738-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Neurooncol ISSN: 0167-594X Impact factor: 4.130
Fig. 1Screenshots of different parts of ReMind: a homepage, b strategy training, and c retraining
Fig. 2Flowchart of enrolment and attrition. NPA neuropsychological assessment, LGG low-grade glioma, MEN meningioma, KPS Karnofsky performance score
Characteristics and adherence per participant
| Sex | Age | Education (years; levela) | Histology | Tumor hemisphere | Tumor location | RTx | CTx | AED | OCFb at T3 | PROMc at T3 | Significant other involved | Strategy training completed (%)d | Retraining completed (%)d | Sufficient adherenced | Reported difficultiese | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ♂ | 68 | 17; 6 | MEN | Left | Frontal | No | No | No | 2 | No | Yes | 83 | 100 | Yes | A |
| 2 | ♀ | 54 | 15; 6 | MEN | Bilateral | Frontal | No | No | No | 0 | No | No | 62 | 178 | No | A |
| 3 | ♂ | 53 | 18; 6 | MEN | Right | Temporal | No | No | Yes | 0 | No | No | 100 | 56 | No | B/C |
| 4 | ♀ | 43 | 15; 6 | MEN | Right | Frontal | No | No | No | 1 | No | No | 17 | 15 | No | D |
| 5 | ♂ | 54 | 15; 5 | Inconcl | Right | Parieto-occipital | No | No | Yes | 4 | An + D | Yes | 100 | 81 | Yes | |
| 6 | ♂ | 59 | 13; 5 | GBM | Right | Insular | Yes | TMZ | Yes | 0 | No | Yes | 42 | 100 | No | |
| 7 | ♂ | 44 | 16; 6 | LGGf | Left | Temporal + insular | Yes | Nog | No | 1 | No | Yes | 100 | 131 | Yes | |
| 8 | ♂ | 61 | 16; 6 | LGGf | Right | Frontal | Yes | TMZ | Yes | 5 | D | Yes | 83 | 84 | Yes | E/F |
| 9 | ♀ | 43 | 13; 4 | MEN | Bilateral | Frontal | No | No | Yes | 3 | No | No | 17 | 13 | No | E |
| 10 | ♂ | 56 | 17; 6 | MEN-II | Right | Frontal | Yes | No | Yes | 0 | No | Yes | 100 | 100 | Yes | E |
| 11 | ♂ | 40 | 20; 6 | LGGf | Left | Temporal | Yes | TMZ | Yes | 0 | No | Yes | 100 | 103 | Yes | |
| 12 | ♀ | 52 | 14; 5 | MEN | Bilateral | Frontal | No | No | No | 0 | No | Yes | 17 | 31 | No | D |
| 13 | ♀ | 47 | 18; 6 | LGG | Right | Frontal | No | No | Yes | 1 | D | Yes | 100 | 100 | Yes | |
| Total | ♂:8♀:5 | Mean 52 | Median | MEN: 7 | L: 3|R: 7 | Frontal: 8 | 5 | 3 | 8 | 7 | 3 | 9 | Mean (median) | Mean (median) | 7 |
RTx radiotherapy prior or during ReMind, CTx chemotherapy prior or during ReMind, AED anti-epileptic drugs, OCF objective cognitive functioning, PROM patient-reported outcome measure, MEN meningioma (WHO-grade I), MEN-II WHO-grade II meningioma, LGG low-grade glioma, GBM glioblastoma multiforme, TMZ temozolomide, An anxiety, D depression
aEducation is classified according to the Dutch coding system of Verhage ranging from 1 (less than primary education) to 7 (university degree) (Verhage, 1964)
bNumber of impaired outcomes of objective cognitive functioning (Z-score of ≤ − 1.5; 11 scores were considered)
cPROMs included the CFQ and HADS, with cut-offs of ≥ 42 and ≥ 8 respectively, ‘No’ indicated no scores above the cut-offs
dTo calculate mean percentages, a maximum of 100% per individual was used. Completion of ≥ 80% of both the strategy training and retraining was considered as sufficient
eA illness of spouse, B technical problems, C return to full-time work, D other priorities, E rehousing, F severe fatigue due to adjuvant treatment
fAwake craniotomy
gReceived temozolomide after T6
Post-intervention ratings of different aspects of ReMind (n = 13)
| Difficulty of | (Too) easy | Just right | (Too) difficult |
| Information in strategy training | 3 | 10 | – |
| Fill-in exercises in strategy training | 1 | 10 | 2 |
| Retraining ( | 4 | 9 | – |
| Amount/number of | (Too) little/few | About right | (Too) much/many |
| Information in strategy training | 1 | 12 | – |
| Fill-in exercises in strategy training | – | 9 | 4 |
| Retraining exercises ( | 4 | 8 | 1 |
| Supervision of the researcher/trainer | – | 13 | – |
| Usefulness of | (Very) useful | Neutral | Not useful |
| Information in strategy training | 7 | 6 | – |
| Fill-in exercises in strategy training | 3 | 9 | 1 |
| Retraining exercises ( | 11 | 2 | – |
| (Telephone) contact with the researcher/trainer | 13 | – | – |
| Content addressed daily problems | Fully/largely | Partly | Not |
| 8 | 4 | 1 | |
| Application of learnt (strategies) in daily life | Often/regularly | Sometimes | Seldom/never |
| 3 | 5 | 5 | |
| Impact of cognitive problems has changed | Yes, positively | Noa | Yes, negatively |
| 6 | 7 | – | |
| Coping with cognitive problems has changed | Improved coping | Nob | Worsened coping |
| 5 | 8 | – | |
| Pleasantness of working on | (Very) pleasant | Neutral | (Very) unpleasant |
| 8 | 3 | 2 | |
| Excellent/good | Sufficient | Insufficient/poor | |
| Using an iPad-app for cognitive rehabilitation | 11 | 1 | 1 |
| Capability of the researcher/trainer | 13 | – | – |
| Contact with the researcher/trainer | 12 | 1 | – |
| Overall rating of the program | 11 | 1 | 1 |
| Yes | No | ||
| Recommendation to other brain tumor patients | 13 | 0 |
aNo change, there was no impact on daily life (5) or no change, impact remained the same (2)
bCoping is still good (8), or coping is still not good (0)