Anja Ophey1, Kathrin Giehl2, Sarah Rehberg3, Carsten Eggers4, Paul Reker5, Thilo van Eimeren6, Elke Kalbe7. 1. Department of Medical Psychology | Neuropsychology & Gender Studies, Center for Neuropsychological Diagnostic and Intervention (CeNDI), Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpenerstr. 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany. Electronic address: anja.ophey@uk-koeln.de. 2. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpenerstr. 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany. Electronic address: kathrin.giehl@uk-koeln.de. 3. Department of Medical Psychology | Neuropsychology & Gender Studies, Center for Neuropsychological Diagnostic and Intervention (CeNDI), Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpenerstr. 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany. Electronic address: sarahrehberg@posteo.de. 4. Department of Neurology, University Hospital of Marburg, Marburg, Germany; Center for Mind, Brain and Behavior - CMBB, Universities of Marburg and Gießen, Baldingerstraße, 35043, Marburg, Germany. Electronic address: carsten.eggers@uk-gm.de. 5. Department of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpenerstr. 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany. Electronic address: paul.reker@uk-koeln.de. 6. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpenerstr. 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany; Department of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpenerstr. 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany; German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Sigmund-Freud-Straße 27, 53127, Bonn, Germany. Electronic address: thilo.van-eimeren@uk-koeln.de. 7. Department of Medical Psychology | Neuropsychology & Gender Studies, Center for Neuropsychological Diagnostic and Intervention (CeNDI), Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpenerstr. 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany. Electronic address: elke.kalbe@uk-koeln.de.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility and evaluate effects of a computerized working memory (WM) training (WMT) in patients with Parkinson's Disease (PD) on cognitive and clinical outcomes. METHODS:76 patients with PD without cognitive impairment were randomized to either the WMT group (n = 37), who participated in a 5-week adaptive WMT, or a passive waiting-list control group (CG, n = 39). Patients underwent clinical and neuropsychological examination at baseline, after training, and at 3-months follow-up, with verbal WM and non-verbal WM as primary outcomes. Outcome assessors were blinded for group allocation. RESULTS: All WMT participants completed the training successfully and reported high levels of motivation for and satisfaction with the training. Repeated-measures, linear mixed-effects models revealed positive training effects for the WMT group compared to the CG in verbal working memory with a small relative effect size 0.39 [95%CI 0.05; 0.76] for the 3-months follow-up only. No other reliable training effects in cognitive and clinical variables were found for either point of time. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized controlled trial, WMT was feasible and yielded some evidence for 3-months follow-up training gains in patients with PD. WMT might be an effective intervention to prevent cognitive decline in this patient group, however, more longitudinal studies with longer follow-up periods and more sensitive assessment tools will have to proof this concept. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00009379).
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility and evaluate effects of a computerized working memory (WM) training (WMT) in patients with Parkinson's Disease (PD) on cognitive and clinical outcomes. METHODS: 76 patients with PD without cognitive impairment were randomized to either the WMT group (n = 37), who participated in a 5-week adaptive WMT, or a passive waiting-list control group (CG, n = 39). Patients underwent clinical and neuropsychological examination at baseline, after training, and at 3-months follow-up, with verbal WM and non-verbal WM as primary outcomes. Outcome assessors were blinded for group allocation. RESULTS: All WMT participants completed the training successfully and reported high levels of motivation for and satisfaction with the training. Repeated-measures, linear mixed-effects models revealed positive training effects for the WMT group compared to the CG in verbal working memory with a small relative effect size 0.39 [95%CI 0.05; 0.76] for the 3-months follow-up only. No other reliable training effects in cognitive and clinical variables were found for either point of time. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized controlled trial, WMT was feasible and yielded some evidence for 3-months follow-up training gains in patients with PD. WMT might be an effective intervention to prevent cognitive decline in this patient group, however, more longitudinal studies with longer follow-up periods and more sensitive assessment tools will have to proof this concept. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00009379).