VR for Improving Attention and Working Memory

June 30, 2022 updated by: Jakub Kazmierski, Medical University of Lodz

Benefits of a Virtual Reality Based Cognitive Intervention for Attention and Working Memory

The main objective of the study is to investigate the effects of using a set of Virtual Reality (VR)-based Digital Therapeutics (DTx) apps to improve the cognitive abilities of healthy (high-functioning) seniors. For the purposes of the study, high-functioning seniors are defined as being over the age of 65 years, while maintaining their functional independence with regards to activities of daily living, including the ability to go on a long walk and the ability to interact with common modern technology (e.g. using a smartphone to send a message).

The study focuses on improving the quality of life of older healthy people by facilitating cognitive training through VR. Healthy people aged 65-85 will be eligible for the project. If the participants meet the inclusion criteria, they will be invited to participate in the study and be provided with detailed information about the research project. Based on sample size calculations, up to two hundred (200) older adults are intended to be included in the project. The participants will use specially designed VR systems and activities aimed at improving their cognitive abilities.

Study Overview

Status

Recruiting

Conditions

Detailed Description

The participants that meet inclusion criteria will be randomly assigned to the experimental group or the control group. The participants in the experimental group will receive a cognitive intervention focused on attention and working memory through virtual reality handsets. The intervention will be delivered at home and monitored by the research team via wifi. The participants will be required to perform the cognitive training at least 3 times a week for 12 weeks (36 training sessions). The participants in the control group will see high definition images through VR handsets without cognitive training.

The CNS-Vital Signs, a computerized neuropsychological battery, will be used to assess primary outcomes (Working Memory and Complex Attention), and will be administered to the participants before the intervention and after 36 training sessions. Differences in performance on primary and secondary outcomes will be analyzed with a Linear Mixed Model Analysis of Variance for longitudinal outcomes. Measures of anxiety and well-being will also be registered.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Anticipated)

100

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 Contact

Study Contact Backup

Study Locations

      • Lodz, Poland, 92-213
        • Recruiting
        • Department of Old Age Psychiatry and Psychotic Disorders Medical University of Lodz

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

65 years to 85 years (Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Healthy or in a stable medical condition
  • Undisturbed locomotion
  • Do not require care or help from others in their everyday functioning
  • Are able to go on long walks unassisted
  • Are able to use common modern technology unassisted (e.g. using a smartphone to send a message)

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Presence of neuropsychiatric disorders, including mild cognitive impairment (MCI) - Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score <26 points
  • Abuse or addiction to alcohol, drugs and tranquilizers
  • Blurred vision that cannot be corrected with lenses or glasses that fit under the VR headset
  • Auditory pathologies causing a significant decrease in hearing unaided
  • High sensitivity to motion sickness
  • Proneness to migraines
  • Subject epileptic
  • Subject vulnerable
  • Subject obese or frail, as assessed based on their Body Mass Index (BMI)
  • Subject considered by the study investigator to be an unsuitable candidate to participate in the study, due to other relevant reasons

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: Double

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: VR training
VR training for at least 10 minutes at least three days per week, resulting in a total of at least 36 sessions (at least ~12 hours of training in total) for each participant, spread across three months. Each session will focus on cognitive training.
The intervention group will receive cognitive training through VR headsets three times a week for 12 weeks. The intervention will be delivered in a virtual setting using images and music. The participants will be allowed to select the type of music and virtual environment during the intervention. The intervention will include four modules targeting attention and working memory through immersive VR.
Sham Comparator: VR activity
VR activity for at least 10 minutes at least three days per week, resulting in a total of at least 36 sessions (at least ~12 hours of training in total) for each participant, spread across three months, with 360º images and videos but without the interactive cognitive training.
High-quality 360º images and videos from natural environments, such as a relaxing mountain environment. The participants in the control group will not receive cognitive training.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Working memory
Time Frame: Change in scores between pre-intervention (baseline) and post-intervention (after 3 months).

Assessed with the "Working Memory" domain from the CNS Vital Signs (CNSVS) computerized neuropsychological battery. The range of scores is from 0 to 38, with higher scores indicating better performance.

A positive change after the intervention corresponds to an improvement in performace from baseline to follow-up.

Change in scores between pre-intervention (baseline) and post-intervention (after 3 months).
Attention
Time Frame: Change in scores between pre-intervention (baseline) and post-intervention (after 3 months).

Assessed with the "Complex Attention" domain from the CNS Vital Signs (CNSVS) computerized neuropsychological battery. The range of scores is from 0 to 76, with higher scores indicating better performance.

A positive change after the intervention corresponds to an improvement in performace from baseline to follow-up.

Change in scores between pre-intervention (baseline) and post-intervention (after 3 months).

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Cognitive functioning
Time Frame: Change in scores between pre-intervention (baseline) and post-intervention (after 3 months).

Assessment of cognitive performance across a wide range of cognitive subdomains on the CNS Vital Signs (CNSVS) computerized battery (composite memory, verbal memory, visual memory, psychomotor speed, reaction time, cognitive flexibility, processing speed, executive function, simple attention, motor speed). The range of scores is from 0 to 40 (depending on the test), with higher scores indicating better performance.

A positive change after the intervention corresponds to an improvement in performace from baseline to follow-up.

Change in scores between pre-intervention (baseline) and post-intervention (after 3 months).
Standard grip strength measurement using a dynamometer
Time Frame: Change in scores between pre-intervention (baseline) and post-intervention (after 3 months).

Assessment of grip strength as a key frailty indicator. The range of scores is from 0 to 90, with higher scores indicating higher grip strength.

A positive change after the intervention corresponds to an improvement in performace from baseline to follow-up.

Change in scores between pre-intervention (baseline) and post-intervention (after 3 months).
The quality of life and the level of perceived well-being
Time Frame: Change in scores between pre-intervention (baseline) and post-intervention (after 3 months).

Assessment of the quality of life and the level of perceived well-being by using the World Health Organization 5 Well-Being Index. The total raw score, ranging from 0 to 25, is multiplied by 4 to give the final score, with 0 representing the worst imaginable well-being and 100 representing the best imaginable well-being.

A positive change after the intervention corresponds to an improvement in well-being from baseline to follow-up.

Change in scores between pre-intervention (baseline) and post-intervention (after 3 months).
Severity of anxiety symptoms
Time Frame: Change in scores between pre-intervention (baseline) and post-intervention (after 3 months).

Assessment of the severity of anxiety symptoms by using Generalized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire (GAD-7). The range of scores is from 0-21, with higher scores suggesting more severe ansiety symptoms.

A positive change after the intervention corresponds to an increase in anxiety symptoms from baseline to follow-up.

Change in scores between pre-intervention (baseline) and post-intervention (after 3 months).
Health-related quality of life
Time Frame: Change in scores between pre-intervention (baseline) and post-intervention (after 3 months).

Assessment of the quantify the health-related quality of life by using the 5-level Euroquol 5D (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire.

The EQ-5D-5L questionnaire has 5 dimensions, each with 5 levels of perceived problems describing 3125 distinct health states: no problems (level 1), slight problems (level 2), moderate problems (level 3), severe problems (level 4), and extreme problems (level 5). EQ-5D-5L is a widely used measure of health-related quality of life.

A positive change in the level of problems corresponds to an increase in the severity of symptoms from baseline to follow-up.

Change in scores between pre-intervention (baseline) and post-intervention (after 3 months).

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Jakub M Kaźmierski, PhD, Medical University of Lodz, Poland

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)

April 30, 2022

Primary Completion (Anticipated)

June 1, 2023

Study Completion (Anticipated)

June 1, 2023

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

April 21, 2022

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

May 6, 2022

First Posted (Actual)

May 11, 2022

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

July 6, 2022

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

June 30, 2022

Last Verified

June 1, 2022

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • RNN/222/21/KE

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

YES

IPD Plan Description

Once the first publication is publicly accessible, the anonymous data generated will be made available for sharing upon request. Shared data will include demographics, primary and secondary outcomes, and VR usability data. A committee of experts within the study team will discuss and decide whether data sharing is appropriate, based on the novelty and scientific rigor of the proposal. Applicants will be asked to sign a data access agreement to ensure a commitment to using the data only for research purposes and to securing the data with appropriate procedures. Redistribution of the data to other third parties will not be allowed.

IPD Sharing Time Frame

Data will become available after the first publication. There is no time restriction for sharing the data.

IPD Sharing Access Criteria

Through formal application. Applicants will be asked to sign a data access agreement to ensure a commitment to using the data only for research purposes and to securing the data with appropriate procedures.

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

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 Virtual Reality

Clinical Trials on VR training

Subscribe