Brain Markers of Improvements in Cognitive Functioning

March 6, 2020 updated by: VA Office of Research and Development

EEG Markers of Training-Induced Improvements in Cognitive Functioning

Some of the most common, persistent, and disabling consequences of traumatic brain injury affect an individual's ability to achieve personal goals. Interventions that strengthen abilities such as being able to concentrate, remember, stay calm and overcome challenges, could have far reaching benefits for Veterans. One challenge in rehabilitation is that response to training can be highly variable, and a better understanding of the neural bases for this variability could inform care. This pilot project will test the clinical behavioral effects of a cognitive skill training intervention and explore to what extent changes in markers of the brain's electrical activity (using the non-invasive technique of electroencephalograms, EEG) can explain differences in responses to skill training.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

Detailed Description: Traumatic brain injuries (TBI) can impair cognitive functioning long after the initial trauma. Some of the most common, persistent, and disabling consequences of traumatic brain injury are deficits in higher order cognitive functions that direct more basic processes based on an individual's goals. Symptoms such as distractibility and difficulty holding goal-relevant information in memory can affect achievement of personal and professional goals. These cognitive problems can be exacerbated by post-traumatic stress (PTS) symptoms, commonly observed in the Veteran population. Interventions that strengthen goal-directed regulation of cognitive-emotion states could have far reaching benefits for Veterans.

One challenge in rehabilitation is that response to training can be highly variable, and a better understanding of the neural bases for this variability could inform patient care. Investigators have developed a system for training neurocognitive skills that can be used in rehabilitation neuroscience studies to elucidate the neural bases of improvements in cognitive functioning. The training system is designed to help patients improve goal-directed brain state regulation, and preliminary work has investigated brain network parameters that may predict response to training. Electroencephalography (EEG) potentially provides easily accessible markers for the neural bases of improvements with training.

Objectives in this pilot study are to investigate the potential of EEG markers to: (1) explain differential responses to attention regulation training; and (2) predict responses to training.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

18

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

    • California
      • Sacramento, California, United States, 95655
        • VA Northern California Health Care System, Mather, CA

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

21 years to 55 years (Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Veterans
  • History of TBI (as defined by the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine and VA, with reported plausible mechanism of head injury, loss of consciousness with some period of posttraumatic alteration in cognition), in the chronic, stable phase of recovery (>6 months from injury)
  • On stable psychoactive medications (> 30 days)
  • Able and willing to participate in EEG, training and, assessments

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Severely apathetic/abulic, aphasic, or other reasons for being unable or unwilling to participate with the training tasks
  • Severe cognitive dysfunction
  • History of neurodevelopmental abnormalities
  • Ongoing illicit drug or alcohol abuse
  • Schizophrenia
  • Bipolar disorder
  • History of other neurological disorders
  • Current medical illnesses that may alter mental status or disrupt participation in the study
  • Active psychotropic medication changes
  • There will be no restriction in regard to gender, race, and socioeconomic status

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: Double

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: State regulation skill training
This arm utilizes a training system designed to strengthen goal-directed cognitive-emotional state regulation skills. The emphasis is on practice and active application of skills across a range of challenge contexts. Digital scenarios provide experiential learning opportunities, allowing Veterans to apply skills to tackle challenges that are calibrated to maximize learning. Coaches guide learning for successful application of skills to challenges in personal life.
Participants complete seven supervised training sessions. Training sessions last 2 hours, and participants are requested to complete approximately 2.5 hours of additional skill practice over the course of each week outside of session (total ~4.5 hours per week).
Active Comparator: Treatment-as-usual
In this arm, participants receive clinical care as usual in VA and other clinics.
Participants receive clinical care as usual over a matched time period.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Composite Score of Attention and Executive Functioning From a Neurocognitive Test Battery
Time Frame: Week 1, before intervention period (baseline)

The investigators created a composite score based upon standardized performance on the following neurocognitive measures of attention and executive functions: Wechsler Adult Intelligence Test - 4th Edition- letter number sequence; Auditory Consonant Trigrams - 9, 18, 36 second conditions; Digit Vigilance Test - Total Errors; Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System Color-Word Interference Trials 3 and 4 - Time and Total Errors; & Trails B - Time. Performance on each measure was scored using populations norms, and these scores are then standardized (Z-scored) and averaged to create a composite outcome (the unit measure being Z-score).

A Z-score reflects the number of standard deviations a given score is away from the population mean: A Z-score of 0 is equal to the population mean, with positive and negative values reflecting performances above and below the population mean, respectively.

Week 1, before intervention period (baseline)
Composite Score of Attention and Executive Functioning From a Neurocognitive Test Battery
Time Frame: Week 8, after the intervention period

The investigators created a composite score based upon standardized performance on the following neurocognitive measures of attention and executive functions: Wechsler Adult Intelligence Test - 4th Edition- letter number sequence; Auditory Consonant Trigrams - 9, 18, 36 second conditions; Digit Vigilance Test - Total Errors; Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System Color-Word Interference Trials 3 and 4 - Time and Total Errors; & Trails B - Time. Performance on each measure was scored using populations norms, and these scores are then standardized (Z-scored) and averaged to create a composite outcome (the unit measure being Z-score).

A Z-score reflects the number of standard deviations a given score is away from the population mean: A Z-score of 0 is equal to the population mean, with positive and negative values reflecting performances above and below the population mean, respectively.

Change will be analyzed for this data as change from before to after the intervention period.

Week 8, after the intervention period

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in Event-Related Potential (ERP) Related to Memory Retrieval (Measured in uV)
Time Frame: Week 8, after the intervention period
Electroencephalography (EEG) will be collected during tasks that require attention and working memory. The old/new ERP effect (difference between brain responses to correctly remembered studied items vs. correctly rejected unstudied items) will be analyzed for this data as change from before to after the intervention period.
Week 8, after the intervention period
Event-Related Potential (ERP) Related to Memory Retrieval (Measured in uV)
Time Frame: Week 1, before the intervention period
Electroencephalography (EEG) will be collected during tasks that require attention and working memory. The old/new ERP effect (difference between brain responses to correctly remembered studied items vs. correctly rejected unstudied items) will be analyzed for this data prior to the intervention period.
Week 1, before the intervention period
Network Modularity From EEG
Time Frame: Week 8, after the intervention period
EEG will be collected during a focused rest condition. Network modularity will be estimated from a matrix of connections between electrodes based on phase coherence, a unit-less measure of correlation between phase angles of EEG signals in the theta (4-8 Hz) frequency range. The modularity metric reflects the strength of modular network organization by summing the difference between the fraction of within-module connections to the total fraction of connections across modules, thus ranging from 0 (random) to 1 (completely modular). Change in network modularity will be analyzed for this data as change from before to after the intervention period.
Week 8, after the intervention period

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Anthony Chen, MD MA, VA Northern California Health Care System, Mather, CA

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 (Actual)

October 1, 2017

Primary Completion (Actual)

March 1, 2019

Study Completion (Actual)

June 1, 2019

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

November 9, 2017

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 29, 2018

First Posted (Actual)

April 6, 2018

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

March 23, 2020

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 6, 2020

Last Verified

March 1, 2020

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • N2240-P
  • 16-12-00774 (Other Grant/Funding Number: VA Northern California Health Care System)

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.

No

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 Brain Injuries

Clinical Trials on State regulation skill training

Subscribe