Nancy D Chiaravalloti1,2, Silvana L Costa3,4, Nancy B Moore3, Kristen Costanza3, John DeLuca3,4,5. 1. Center for Neuropsychology and Neuroscience Research, Kessler Foundation, 120 Eagle Rock Avenue, Suite 100, East Hanover, NJ, 07936, USA. nchiaravalloti@kesslerfoundation.org. 2. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Rutgers -New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, 07103, USA. nchiaravalloti@kesslerfoundation.org. 3. Center for Neuropsychology and Neuroscience Research, Kessler Foundation, 120 Eagle Rock Avenue, Suite 100, East Hanover, NJ, 07936, USA. 4. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Rutgers -New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, 07103, USA. 5. Department of Neurology and Neurosciences, Rutgers -New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, 07103, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The current study examines the efficacy of speed of processing training (SOPT) to improve processing speed (PS) in individuals with multiple sclerosis (MS). Outcomes included changes in the useful field of view (UFOV) and neuropsychological evaluation (NPE). METHODS: This double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial included 84 participants with clinically definite MS and impaired PS, 43 in the treatment group and 41 in the placebo control group. Participants completed a baseline NPE and a repeat NPE post-treatment. The treatment group was randomized to booster sessions or no contact. Long-term follow-up assessments were completed 6 months after treatment. RESULTS: A significant effect of SOPT was observed on both the UFOV (large effect) and pattern comparison with a similar pattern of results noted on letter comparison, albeit at a trend level. The treatment effect was maintained 6 months later. The impact of booster sessions was not significant. Correlations between degree of improvement on the UFOV and the number of levels completed within each training task were significant for both speed and divided attention indicating that completion of more levels of training correlated with greater benefit. CONCLUSION: SOPT is effective for treating PS deficits in MS with benefit documented on both the UFOV and a neuropsychological measure of PS. Less benefit was observed as the outcome measures became more distinct in cognitive demands from the treatment. Long-term maintenance was observed. The number of training levels completed within the 10-sessions exerted a significant impact on treatment benefit, with more levels completed resulting in greater benefit.
OBJECTIVE: The current study examines the efficacy of speed of processing training (SOPT) to improve processing speed (PS) in individuals with multiple sclerosis (MS). Outcomes included changes in the useful field of view (UFOV) and neuropsychological evaluation (NPE). METHODS: This double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial included 84 participants with clinically definite MS and impaired PS, 43 in the treatment group and 41 in the placebo control group. Participants completed a baseline NPE and a repeat NPE post-treatment. The treatment group was randomized to booster sessions or no contact. Long-term follow-up assessments were completed 6 months after treatment. RESULTS: A significant effect of SOPT was observed on both the UFOV (large effect) and pattern comparison with a similar pattern of results noted on letter comparison, albeit at a trend level. The treatment effect was maintained 6 months later. The impact of booster sessions was not significant. Correlations between degree of improvement on the UFOV and the number of levels completed within each training task were significant for both speed and divided attention indicating that completion of more levels of training correlated with greater benefit. CONCLUSION: SOPT is effective for treating PS deficits in MS with benefit documented on both the UFOV and a neuropsychological measure of PS. Less benefit was observed as the outcome measures became more distinct in cognitive demands from the treatment. Long-term maintenance was observed. The number of training levels completed within the 10-sessions exerted a significant impact on treatment benefit, with more levels completed resulting in greater benefit.
Authors: Victoria M Leavitt; Jean Lengenfelder; Nancy B Moore; Nancy D Chiaravalloti; John DeLuca Journal: J Clin Exp Neuropsychol Date: 2011-01-10 Impact factor: 2.475
Authors: Ludovico Pedullà; Giampaolo Brichetto; Andrea Tacchino; Claudio Vassallo; Paola Zaratin; Mario Alberto Battaglia; Laura Bonzano; Marco Bove Journal: J Neuroeng Rehabil Date: 2016-10-04 Impact factor: 4.262