| Literature DB >> 35740759 |
Agnese Capodieci1, Marco Romano2, Emanuela Castro3, Maria Chiara Di Lieto3, Silvia Bonetti4, Silvia Spoglianti5, Chiara Pecini1.
Abstract
Executive function deficits are documented in many neurodevelopmental disorders and may contribute to clinical complexity or rehabilitation resilience. The present research was primarily aimed at presenting and evaluating the feasibility and effectiveness of a telerehabilitation program used during the pandemic period. MemoRAN (Anastasis), a computerised cognitive training to improve executive control during visual-verbal integration tasks was used in a sample of 42 children (5-11 years old) with specific learning or language disorders. The MemoRAN training was based on exercises of inhibition, cognitive flexibility and updating in working memory for three months, with a frequency of approximately three sessions per week. Afterwards, a comparison between a subgroup of children using Memo-RAN and an active control group, using a tele-rehabilitation program directed on reading was conducted. Effect size analysis in pre-post measurements suggests an average effect of MemoRAN in measurements that require control processes, such as accuracy in dictation, reading, inhibition and working memory testing. Comparison with the active control group and the clinical utility implications of these types of treatment will be discussed.Entities:
Keywords: computerised cognitive training; executive function; language disorder; learning disabilities; rapid automatized naming; tele-rehabilitation; working memory
Year: 2022 PMID: 35740759 PMCID: PMC9222183 DOI: 10.3390/children9060822
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Children (Basel) ISSN: 2227-9067
Age, perceptual reasoning Index (IRP) and intellectual quotient (IQ) of the participants, based on numerosity (N), mean (M), standard deviation (SD), maximum value (MAX) and minimum value (MIN).
| N | M (Months) | SD | MAX | MIN | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AGE | 42 | 103 | 42 | 137 | 59 |
| IRP | 38 | 99.47 | 12.81 | 132 | 78 |
| IQ | 37 | 90.43 | 10.53 | 108 | 70 |
Types of exercises presented in MemoRAN.
| Exercise 1. Inversion | This is an inhibition exercise that requires reversing the naming of two stimuli, out of five that are presented; there is a preview phase, in which the child sees which stimuli have to be named correctly and which to reverse. |
| Exercise 2. Cluster | In this exercise, several figures are presented or highlighted at the same time, within a cluster defined by a yellow rectangle; the child is asked to name only the stimuli highlighted by the red square (within the cluster). We can define this exercise as an activity of attentional focusing with shifting of visual and spatial attention. With each omission or error in naming, the parent will report the error on the application. |
| Exercise 3. Ran variable time | This task requires the child to quickly name all the stimuli s/he sees; the peculiarity is that the figures are presented with a very variable exposure and inter-stimuli time: sometimes very slow, sometimes very fast, sometimes medium. Therefore, the child will have to inhibit his own automatic rhythm and adapt to that imposed by the outside world, that is, by the advance. With each omission or error in naming, the parent will report the error on the application. |
| Exercise 4. Action | This is a dual-task activity, in which the child will have to name the figures as they are, as well as having to perform an action at the same time as the naming, for two specific marked stimuli. The aim is to encourage integration between a visual-verbal task and a motor control task, increasing the complexity of the processing/response mode. |
| Exercise 5. 1-back | It is a working memory exercise: the child must name the figures as they are; however, should not name the figure surrounded by the red square but the previous stimulus, that after being appeared will be replaced by a red dot; it is also important that the clinician tells the child to follow the rhythm of the visual cue. With each omission or error in 1-back naming, the parent will report the error on the application. |
| Exercise 6. Inversion and action | In this exercise, a complex dual task is proposed: among the five stimuli presented, two will have inverted naming, two others will be associated with an action, and the last stimulus will require simple naming as presented. Error may result from inaccuracies in naming or actions. |
| Exercise 7. Silence and action | This is another dual-task exercise but also includes an inhibition component: silence is required for one stimulus, silence is required for another stimulus at the same time as the tapping action on the table, and simple naming is required for the other three stimuli. The error comes from not respecting silence or respecting it for stimuli that are not required, as well as making mistakes in the execution of actions. |
| Exercise 8. 2-back | This exercise consists in naming the stimulus that precedes the highlighted one by two positions, keeping to the rhythm of the visual cue. If the child omits or makes a mistake in naming or does not name the figure two positions ahead, parents report the error. |
Figure 1Types of stimuli presentation (in order single stimulus, progressive, anti-progressive and all visible).
Figure 2Example of monitoring screen.
Descriptive statistics, Student’s t-test or Wilcox Z, significance, and Cohen’s d for protocol measures at T0 and T1.
| TEST | N | M (DS) PRE | M (DS) POST | t/Z |
| d di Cohen |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Word dictation (DDE-2–errors) | 27 | 16.15 (9.56) | 12.19(8.87) | −3.12 | −1.22 ** | |
| Alce–comprehension (correct responses) | 17 | 6.88 (5.45) | 7.41 (4.89) | −0.39 | n.s. | −0.20 |
| Alce–reading speed (syll/s) | 26 | 1.53 (0.94) | 1.76 (1.05) | −2.43 | −0.97 ** | |
| Alce–reading accuracy (errors) | 26 | 8.78 (5.86) | 6.75 (5.27) | Z = −2.172 | 1.04 ** | |
| NEPSY-II–verbal fluency correct responses | 37 | 16.72 (5.52) | 17.62 (5.94) | −1.84 | −0.61 * | |
| RAN–response time | 38 | 125.21 (64.80) | 117.95 (65.18) | Z = −2.110 | 0.55 * | |
| RAN–accuracy (errors) | 37 | 2.36 (2.65) | 2.15 (2.57) | 0.61 | n.s. | 0.20 |
| PRCR-2–SD4 response time | 28 | 251.93 (89.89) | 239.04 (105.05) | 0.85 | n.s. | 0.33 |
| PRCR-2–SD4 errors | 29 | 8.34 (6.87) | 6.62 (7.34) | 1.64 | 0.62 * | |
| PRCR-2–SD4 target found | 29 | 23.31 (6.44) | 24.21 (6.77) | −0.92 | n.s. | −0.35 |
| NEPSY-II–inhibition rapidity (s) | 37 | 59.83 (22.87) | 55.69 (27.56) | 1.34 | 0.45 | |
| NEPSY-II –inhibition accuracy (errors) | 37 | 4.60 (4.15) | 2.66 (2.71) | 3.96 | 1.32 ** | |
| Digit span forward | 35 | 4.46 (1.60) | 4.66 (1.49) | −0.93 | n.s. | −0.32 |
| Digit span backward | 28 | 3.57 (1.32) | 4.07 (1.49) | −1.68 | −0.65 * | |
| BAF-listening span test–n. words | 28 | 10.39 (4.93) | 12.29(6.38) | −2.00 | −0.77 * | |
| BRIEF | 30 | 18.18 (16.07) | 18.20 (16.25) | Z = −0.097 | n.s. | −0.03 |
Note: * for Cohen’s d between 0.50 and 0.90 and ** for Cohen’s d between >0.90; n.s. = not significant.