Efficacy of an Attentional Process Training Using Competitive Versus Non Competitive Strategies

August 18, 2015 updated by: Hospitales Nisa
Within a prospective, randomised, controlled study 60, selected patients with chronic (> 6 months) stroke or traumatic brain injury will be randomised to 30 1-hour sessions of competitive versus non-competitive attentional training. Competitive training will include fifteen 1-hour sessions of standard (paper and pencil) training under competitive situations and fifteen 1-hour sessions of competitive attentional games designed for this purpose using a new virtual reality system (conventional liquid-crystal-display screen with an infrared LED array to facilitate multi-touch experience embedded in a conventional table). Progress will be evaluated by pre and post measurement of attentional neuropsychological tests, subjective reports of global attention, usability and motivational scales. Our hypothesis is that competitive training is more effective in improving attention than conventional training in the chronic phase after acquired brain injury.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

Participants: Sixty 18-75 years-old patients with acquired brain injury, will be randomly assigned to 30 sessions of competitive versus non-competitive cognitive attentional training (see inclusion-exclusion criteria). Material and Methods: Randomized clinical trial comparing two different attentional training strategies. Attentional measures, usability data and caregiver/family perception of change, will be compared after completing both conditions. Competitive training will include a new computer based training program that involve using attentional skills under different competitive scenarios. Attentional exercises were designed according to the instructions of two experts neuropsychologists and included game-based situations simulating different olympic disciplines.Neuropsychological protocol: An assessment before the beginning of the intervention and pos-treatment will be done by a trained blinded neuropsychologist using measures of selective, sustained, divided and alternating attention (see primary outcome measures). Usability and Motivation: It is well-known that game-based cognitive exercises can increase motivation to treatment which in turn can increase learning strategies and improve outcomes after rehabilitation processes. Competitive tasks can also improve the effort and interest of the players and the intensity of the task through increasing motivation to win, get a reward and beat the others. Since motivation was an important element of our research, we assessed this capacity at the end of the treatment with the Intrinsic Motivation Scale. Also, the revised Competitiveness Index was used to measure the subject's preference for competitive situations. Finally, usability was considered a secondary outcome of our study since most of the games employed here were designed to be played in a new virtual reality system which was build to facilitate competitive strategies among 2-4 players (see secondary outcomes). Sample Size Calculation: There was any previous study that used the design proposed in this investigation. Considering a reduction bigger of 20% on the Hit-Reaction Time of the CPT-II scores in the active group intervention, sample size in both groups of 27 participants and standard-deviation in the magnitude of half of the medium score in each group (moderate variability), the study will be able to detect a moderate effect size (ES = 0,4). Calculating a sample loss of 10% each group, we define a sample size per group of 30 individuals. Statistical methods Statistical analyses will be performed with Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) 12.0. The univariate analyses will be performed with the t student test / Mann-Whitney to continuous variables or Chi-Square test (X²) / Fischer test to categorical variables. The effective of the intervention over time will be assess through analyses of mixed models (repeated measures ANOVA).

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

60

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

      • Valencia, Spain, 46011
        • Hospitales NISA

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years to 75 years (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Acquired brain injury patients (stroke and traumatic brain injury)
  • Chronicity > 6 months
  • More than 3 months under cognitive rehabilitation
  • Mississippi Aphasia Screening Test (comprehension subtest > 45)

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Severe cognitive impairment defined as < 23 on Mini Mental Status Examination
  • Unable to give informed consent
  • Visual or auditive disorders limiting the ability to comply with treatment regimen

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Competitive Training
The patients will receive only competitive activities designed to restore attention abilities. These include pencil-and-paper tasks completed under competitive circumstances and competitive virtual games specifically designed to treat different aspects of attention (divided, selective, sustained, etc).
30 sessions of competitive cognitive training; 3 - 5 sessions/week; duration 45 min
Active Comparator: Non-Competitive Training
The patients will receive conventional attentional training. Pencil and paper tasks focused on different aspects of attention (divided, selective, sustained, etc.) will be completed by all participant under individual or group-therapy sessions. No competitive training will be allowed.
30 sessions of non-competitive cognitive training; 3 - 5 sessions/week; duration 45 min

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in attentional psychometric measures
Time Frame: Baseline versus end of treatment (an expected average of 8 weeks)
Neuropsychological battery: Conner's Continuous Performance Test (CPT-II), Color-Trail Test, d2, Stroop test, Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-IV digit-span, Corsi block-tapping test
Baseline versus end of treatment (an expected average of 8 weeks)

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Usability measures
Time Frame: Baseline versus end of treatment (an expected average of 8 weeks)
System Usability Scale, Intrinsic Motivation Inventory
Baseline versus end of treatment (an expected average of 8 weeks)

Other Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Family-centered outcomes
Time Frame: Baseline versus end of treatment (an expected average of 8 weeks)
Moos Attention Rating Scale, Subjective perception of improvement
Baseline versus end of treatment (an expected average of 8 weeks)

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Roberto Llorens, PhD, Universitat Politècnica de València

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

October 1, 2014

Primary Completion (Actual)

March 1, 2015

Study Completion (Actual)

March 1, 2015

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

August 18, 2014

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

August 19, 2014

First Posted (Estimate)

August 20, 2014

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

August 19, 2015

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

August 18, 2015

Last Verified

August 1, 2015

More Information

Terms related to this study

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Stroke

Clinical Trials on Competitive training

3
Subscribe