Effectiveness of a Cognitive Training Program (UMAM Method) in Elderly People Without Dementia

January 25, 2020 updated by: Madrid Salud

Cognitive Training in Elders Without Dementia Using UMAM Method. Genetic, Brain Volume and Cognitive Reserve Predictors: A Randomized Controlled Study

The study is oriented to analyze the effectiveness of a cognitive training method (UMAM) on cognitive functions, subjective memory and mood state in elderly people without dementia. On the other hand, the study aims to examine whether variables such as cognitive reserve (e.g. educational level), APOE genotype and intracranial volume are related to increased benefit after the intervention. The researchers hope to find that greater cognitive reserve, not having the APOE allele ε4, and a greater volume of memory-related brain areas, are associated with better outcomes after the cognitive intervention.

Study Overview

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

199

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

      • Madrid, Spain, 28006
        • Centro de Prevención del Deterioro Cognitivo

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

60 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Being over 60 years old.
  • Having a global cognitive performance > 23 in the Mini Mental State Examination Test.
  • Having no history of neurological or serious psychiatric disorders (severe psycho-affective disorders and psychosis or other psychiatric disorders like alcoholism).

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Chronic use of anxiolytics.
  • Chronic use of neuroleptics.
  • Chronic use of anticonvulsants.
  • Having hearing or vision impairments that would preclude testing.
  • Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) contraindications.

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: Prevention
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Experimental Group

The experimental group carried out a 30-session multi-factorial group memory training program (UMAM method), with a frequency of three weekly sessions of 90 minutes each. The training program consists of four modules: 1- Stimulation of cognitive processes; learning and practicing internal memory strategies and solving everyday forgetfulness; 2- Instruction in basic concepts about memory; 3- Intervention on daily living and forgetting experiences, using internal and external strategies to solve everyday memory failures; 4- Metacognition or metamemory: the subjects were to reflect about their cognitive failures by analyzing the causes and variables of those failures.

In addition, the experimental group followed the standard activities in which all users attending the Center are involved (planned interviews, dialogue-conferences, general health recommendations, etc.).

No Intervention: Control Group
The Control Group followed the standard activities in which all users attending the Center are involved (planned interviews, dialogue-conferences, general health recommendations, etc.).

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in general cognition
Time Frame: This cognitive variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
The measure of the post-intervention change in general cognition, assessed with the Mini Mental State Examination Test (MMSE) and the 7 Minutes Test (7M).The score ranges from 0 to 30 points (MMSE) and from 0 to 89 points (7M). In both cases, the higher scores indicate a better outcome.
This cognitive variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
Change in verbal memory
Time Frame: This cognitive variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
The measure of the post-intervention change in verbal memory, assessed with the Word List Test of the Wechsler Memory Scale-III. The score ranges from 0 to 48 points. Higher scores indicate a better outcome.
This cognitive variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
Change in logical memory
Time Frame: This cognitive variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
The measure of the post-intervention change in immediate and delayed logical memory, assessed with the Logical Memory Test (immediate and delayed units) of the Wechsler Memory Scale-III. The score ranges from 0 to 75 points (immediate units) and from 0 to 50 (delayed units). Higher scores indicate a better outcome.
This cognitive variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
Change in visual memory
Time Frame: This cognitive variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
The measure of the post-intervention change in visual memory, assessed with the Rey memory test (form B). The score ranges from 0 to 22 points. Higher scores indicate a better outcome.
This cognitive variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
Change in daily memory
Time Frame: This cognitive variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
The measure of the post-intervention change in daily memory, assessed with the Rivermead Behavioral Memory Test. The score ranges from 0 to 24 points. Higher scores indicate a better outcome.
This cognitive variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
Change in attentional amplitude
Time Frame: This cognitive variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
The measure of the post-intervention change in attentional amplitude, assessed with the Direct Digit Test of the Wechsler Memory Scale-III. The score ranges from 0 to 16 points. Higher scores indicate a better outcome.
This cognitive variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
Change in attentional control
Time Frame: This cognitive variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
The measure of the post-intervention change in attentional control, assessed with the Inverse Digit Test of the Wechsler Memory Scale-III. The score ranges from 0 to 14 points. Higher scores indicate a better outcome.
This cognitive variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
Change in attention and processing speed
Time Frame: This cognitive variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
The measure of the post-intervention change in attention, assessed with the Trail Making Test, form A. The score ranges from 0 to 200 points. Higher scores indicate a worse outcome.
This cognitive variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
Change in alternating attention and planning
Time Frame: This cognitive variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
The measure of the post-intervention change in alternating attention and planning, assessed with the Trail Making Test, form B. The score ranges from 0 to 400 points. Higher scores indicate a worse outcome.
This cognitive variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
Change in naming ability (language)
Time Frame: This cognitive variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
The measure of the post-intervention change in naming ability, assessed with the Boston Naming Test. The score ranges from 0 to 60 points. Higher scores indicate a better outcome.
This cognitive variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
Change in verbal fluency (language)
Time Frame: This cognitive variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
The measure of the post-intervention change in phonologic and semantic verbal fluency, assessed with the Phonological Verbal Fluency Test and the Semantic Fluency Test respectively. The score goes from zero onwards (there is no upper limit). Higher scores indicate a better outcome.
This cognitive variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
Change in subjective memory
Time Frame: This variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
The measure of the post-intervention change in Subjective Memory, assessed with the Memory Failures of Everyday Questionnaire.The score ranges from 0 to 56 points. Higher scores indicate a worse outcome.
This variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
Change in mood
Time Frame: This variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
The measure of the post-intervention change in mood, assessed with the Geriatric Depression Scale. The score ranges from 0 to 15 points. Higher scores indicate a worse outcome.
This variable was assessed before and after the intervention. The interval between the pre and post-intervention assessment was 6 months.
The Cognitive Reserve as a predictor of change.
Time Frame: Cognitive Reserve was assessed in the pre-intervention assessment.
The Cognitive Reserve was assessed with Rami Test. The score ranges from 0 to 25 points.
Cognitive Reserve was assessed in the pre-intervention assessment.
The Genetic Profile as a predictor of change.
Time Frame: The Genetic Profile was assessed in the pre-intervention assessment.
The Genetic Profile was obtained by genetic analysis employing a blood test. APOE gene has been coded as 1 (meaning no ε4 allele), or 0 (for at least one ε4 allele).
The Genetic Profile was assessed in the pre-intervention assessment.
The Brain Volume as a predictor of change.
Time Frame: The Brain Volume was assessed in the pre-intervention assessment.
The Brain Volume (total gray volume, left hippocampus, right hippocampus and total intracranial volume) was assessed by magnetic resonance imaging. Unit of measure: mm3.
The Brain Volume was assessed in the pre-intervention assessment.

Collaborators and Investigators

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

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, 2013

Primary Completion (Actual)

May 1, 2015

Study Completion (Actual)

May 1, 2015

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

December 22, 2019

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 25, 2020

First Posted (Actual)

January 29, 2020

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

January 29, 2020

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 25, 2020

Last Verified

January 1, 2020

More Information

Terms related to this study

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 Age-Related Memory Disorders

Clinical Trials on Multifactorial Memory Training Program (UMAM method)

3
Subscribe