Cognitive training in the elderly: a randomized trial to evaluate the efficacy of a self-administered cognitive training program

ABSTRACT

Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of a self-administered cognitive training program for improving cognition in normal elderly persons.

Method: A multisite, randomized control, double-blind trial was conducted with 28 experimental participants (M_age = 70.7 ± 8.89) and 28 active controls (M_age = 74.4 ± 9.39). Treatment conditions: experimental intervention (EI) consisted of three modules: (1) executive functioning, (2) memory, and (3) emotion training. Active control (AC) consisted of word searches, reading short stories, and answering multiple-choice questions. Treatments were self-administered one hour/five days a week for four weeks. Pre-and post-training neuropsychological outcome measures were utilized as determinants of program success.

Results: Compared to the AC group, the EI group displayed significant gains on targeted executive (p = .002) and memory (p < .001) composites, but not the emotion (p = .105) composite. Training-induced benefits were also observed for the EI group on untrained items within global cognition (BCRS, p = .002) and functional abilities (DAD, p < .001; FRS, p = .042). The percentage of participants who showed reliable performance improvements was greater for the EI than AC on executive (55.5% vs. 12.5%), memory (55% vs. 19.5%) and functional (41% vs. 7.5%) ability. Participant recruitment and compliance rates were enhanced by the involvement of a physician.

Conclusion: Results support the efficacy of self-directed cognitive training in reliably improving cognitive and functional abilities in normal older adults. While physicians are critical in enhancing the delivery of regimented treatment, the present study illustrates the potential for self-directed prophylactic training in deterring the development of cognitive decline.

KEYWORDS:

• Cognitive training
• age associated memory problems
• experimental trial

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.