Abstract
Cognitive difficulties are common following stroke and can have widespread impacts on everyday functioning. Technological advances offer the possibility of individualised cognitive training for patients at home, potentially providing a low-cost, low-intensity adjunct to rehabilitation services. Using this approach, we have previously demonstrated post-training improvements in attention and everyday functioning in fronto-parietal stroke patients. Here we examine whether these benefits are observed more broadly in a community stroke sample. Patients were randomised to either 4 weeks of online adaptive attention training (SAT), working memory training (WMT) or waitlist (WL). Cognitive and everyday function measures were collected before and after intervention, and after 3months. During training, weekly measures of patients’ subjective functioning were collected. The training was well received and compliance good. No differences in standardised cognitive tests were observed for either intervention relative to controls. However, on patient reported outcomes, SAT participants showed greater levels of improvement in everyday functioning than WMT or WL participants. In line with our previous work, everyday functioning improvements were greatest for patients with spatial impairments and those who received SAT training. Whether attention training can be recommended for stroke survivors depends on whether cognitive test performance or everyday functioning is considered more relevant.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
ISRCTN59754564
Funding Statement
This work was supported by The Stroke Association under Grant TSA 2013/06 and Medical Research Council UK grants SUAG/ 003/RG91365 and SUAG/049.G101400.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study was submitted via the National Research Ethics Service (NRES) for review by the NRES Committee East of England - Cambridge Central. Ethical approval was given (NRES 14/EE/0149) The study was also submitted for approval by NHS (National Health Service) Health Research Authority, as the study involved NHS patients. The HRA approved the study. IRAS (Integrated Research Application System) no 150538.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data will be made open upon acceptance in a journal
