| Literature DB >> 34291527 |
Bing Xue1, Ao Xiao1, Xianwu Luo1,2, Rui Li2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to explore whether game training could improve cognitive functioning and depression symptoms in the elderly affected by mild cognitive impairment (MCI).Entities:
Keywords: MCI; depression; game training; the elderly
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34291527 PMCID: PMC8633942 DOI: 10.1002/mpr.1887
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Methods Psychiatr Res ISSN: 1049-8931 Impact factor: 4.035
FIGURE 1Participants recruitment and flow diagram of mild cognitive impairment patients with depression in the treatment of game training
The characteristics of the elderly in the intervention group and the control group at baseline
| Variables | Intervention group ( | Control group ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) mean ± SD | 75.42 ± 4.576 | 73.44 ± 4.884 | 0.081 |
| Gender | 0.623 | ||
| Male | 11 (30.6%) | 13 (36.1%) | |
| Female | 25 (69.4%) | 23 (63.9%) | |
| Education | 0.743 | ||
| Primary school and no degree | 14 (38.9%) | 14 (38.9%) | |
| High school or polytechnic | 17 (47.2%) | 19 (52.8%) | |
| University degree | 5 (13.9%) | 3 (8.4%) | |
| Marital status | 0.074 | ||
| Married | 13 (36.1%) | 5 (13.9%) | |
| Single | 23 (63.9%) | 31 (86.4%) | |
| Smoking | 9 (25%) | 8 (22.2%) | 0.785 |
| Drinking | 3 (8.3%) | 2 (5.6%) | 0.649 |
| Sleep status | 0.103 | ||
| Below 3 h | 3 (8.3%) | 7 (19.4%) | |
| 3−6 h | 11 (30.6%) | 13 (36.1%) | |
| 6 h above | 22 (61.1%) | 16 (44.4%) | |
| Learning or reading | 0.555 | ||
| Always | 6 (16.7%) | 6 (16.7%) | |
| Little | 22 (61.1%) | 25 (69.4%) | |
| Never | 8 (22.2%) | 5 (13.9%) | |
| Exercise | 0.459 | ||
| Always | 3 (8.3%) | 1 (2.8%) | |
| Little | 24 (66.7%) | 31 (86.1%) | |
| Never | 9 (25%) | 4 (11.1%) | |
| Chronic disease | 25 (69.4%) | 24 (66.7%) | 0.804 |
| Family history | 21 (58.3%) | 14 (38.9%) | 0.102 |
The smoking and drinking variables only reflect current status.
The distribution of the MoCA scores of the intervention group and the control group
| MoCA | Intervention group | Control group |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ( | ( | |||
| Baseline | 20.56 ± 1.443 | 19.64 ± 2.416 | 3.820 | 0.055 |
| Post‐intervention | 20.97 ± 1.362 | 19.92 ± 2.048 | 6.631 | 0.012 |
| Z‐value | −2.950 | −0.739 | ||
|
| 0.003 | 0.460 |
Abbreviation: MoCA, Montreal Cognitive Assessment.
F: One‐way ANOVA.
Z value: Wilcoxon analysis.
The distribution of the GDS‐15 scores of the intervention group and the control group
| GDS‐15 | Intervention group | Control group |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ( | ( | |||
| Baseline | 8.94 ± 0.860 | 8.61 ± 0.803 | 3.890 | 0.094 |
| Post‐intervention | 7.33 ± 0.828 | 8.36 ± 0.961 | 23.638 | <0.001 |
|
| −5.020 | −1.767 | ||
|
| <0.001 | 0.077 |
Abbreviation: GDS‐15, Geriatric Depression Scale.
F: One‐way ANOVA.
Z‐value: Wilcoxon analysis.