The efficacy of prospective memory rehabilitation plus metacognitive skills training for adults with traumatic brain injury: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Jennifer Fleming, Tamara Ownsworth, Emmah Doig, Lauren Hutton, Janelle Griffin, Melissa Kendall, David H K Shum, Jennifer Fleming, Tamara Ownsworth, Emmah Doig, Lauren Hutton, Janelle Griffin, Melissa Kendall, David H K Shum

Abstract

Background: Impairment of prospective memory (PM) is common following traumatic brain injury (TBI) and negatively impacts on independent living. Compensatory approaches to PM rehabilitation have been found to minimize the impact of PM impairment in adults with TBI; however, poor self-awareness after TBI poses a major barrier to the generalization of compensatory strategies in daily life. Metacognitive skills training (MST) is a cognitive rehabilitation approach that aims to facilitate the development of self-awareness in adults with TBI. This paper describes the protocol of a study that aims to evaluate the efficacy of a MST approach to compensatory PM rehabilitation for improving everyday PM performance and psychosocial outcomes after TBI.

Methods/design: This randomized controlled trial has three treatment groups: compensatory training plus metacognitive skills training (COMP-MST), compensatory training only (COMP), and waitlist control. Participants in the COMP-MST and COMP groups will complete a 6-week intervention consisting of six 2-h weekly training sessions. Each 1.5-h session will involve compensatory strategy training and 0.5 h will incorporate either MST (COMP-MST group) or filler activity as an active control (COMP group). Participants in the waitlist group receive care as usual for 6 weeks, followed by the COMP-MST intervention. Based on the sample size estimate, 90 participants with moderate to severe TBI will be randomized into the three groups using a stratified sampling approach. The primary outcomes include measures of PM performance in everyday life and level of psychosocial reintegration. Secondary outcomes include measures of PM function on psychometric testing, strategy use, self-awareness, and level of support needs following TBI. Blinded assessments will be conducted pre and post intervention, and at 3-month and 6-month follow-ups.

Discussion: This study seeks to determine the efficacy of COMP-MST for improving and maintaining everyday PM performance and level of psychosocial integration in adults with moderate to severe TBI. The findings will advance theoretical understanding of the role of self-awareness in compensatory PM rehabilitation and skills generalization. COMP-MST has the potential to reduce the cost of rehabilitation and lifestyle support following TBI because the intervention could enhance generalization success and lifelong application of PM compensatory strategies.

Trial registration: New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12615000996561 . Registered on 23 September 2015; retrospectively registered 2 months after commencement.

Keywords: Brain injury; Prospective memory; Randomized controlled trial; Rehabilitation; Self-awareness.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Trial design flowchart (COMP compensatory training, COMP-MST compensatory training plus metacognitive skills training)
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) diagram

References

    1. Canty AL, Shum DHK, Levin HS, Chan RCK. Memory impairments after traumatic brain injury. In: Levin HS, Shum DHK, Chan RCK, editors. Understanding traumatic brain injury: current research and future directions. New York: Oxford University Press; 2014. pp. 71–98.
    1. Vakil E. The effect of moderate to severe traumatic brain injury on different aspects of memory: a selective review. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2005;27:977–1021. doi: 10.1080/13803390490919245.
    1. Kvavilashvili L, Ellis J. Varieties of intention: some distinctions and classifications. In: Brandimonte M, Einstein GO, McDaniel MA, editors. Prospective memory: theory and applications. Mahwah: Erlbaum; 1996. pp. 23–51.
    1. Maujean A, Shum DHK, MacQueen R. Effect of cognitive demand on prospective memory in individuals with traumatic brain injury. Brain Impair. 2003;4:135–45. doi: 10.1375/brim.4.2.135.27024.
    1. Roche N, Fleming J, Shum DHK. Self-awareness of prospective memory failure in adults with traumatic brain injury. Brain Inj. 2002;16:931–46. doi: 10.1080/02699050210138581.
    1. Shum D, Levin H, Chan RCK. Prospective memory in patients with closed head injury: a review. Neuropsychologia. 2011;49:2156–65. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.02.006.
    1. Winograd E. Some observations on prospective remembering. In: Gruneberg MM, Morris PE, Sykes RN, editors. Practical aspects of memory: current research as issues. Chichester: Wiley; 1998. pp. 348–53.
    1. Fleming J, Shum DHK, Strong J, Lightbody S. Prospective memory rehabilitation for adults with traumatic brain injury: a compensatory training programme. Brain Inj. 2005;19:1–13. doi: 10.1080/02699050410001720059.
    1. Shum D, Fleming J, Gill H, Gullo M, Strong J. A randomised controlled trial of prospective memory rehabilitation in adults with traumatic brain injury. J Rehabil Med. 2011;43:216–33. doi: 10.2340/16501977-0647.
    1. Ellis J. Prospective memory or the realization of delayed intentions: a conceptual framework for research. In: Brandimonte M, Einstein GO, McDaniel MA, editors. Prospective memory: theory and applications. Mahwah: Erlbaum; 1996. pp. 1–22.
    1. Stuss D, Alexander M. Executive functions and the frontal lobes: a conceptual view. Psychol Res. 2000;63:289–98. doi: 10.1007/s004269900007.
    1. Shum D, Valentine M, Cutmore T. Performance of traumatic brain-injured individuals on time-, event-, and activity-based prospective memory tasks. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1999;21:49–58. doi: 10.1076/jcen.21.1.49.943.
    1. Shum D, Fleming J, Neulinger K. Prospective memory and traumatic brain injury: a review. Brain Impair. 2002;3:1–16. doi: 10.1375/brim.3.1.1.
    1. Raskin SA, Sohlberg MM. The efficacy of prospective memory training in two adults with brain injury. J Head Trauma Rehab. 1996;11:32–51. doi: 10.1097/00001199-199606000-00007.
    1. Sohlberg MM, White O, Evans E, Mateer C. Background and initial case studies into the effects of prospective memory training. Brain Inj. 1992;6:129–38. doi: 10.3109/02699059209029651.
    1. Piras F, Borella E, Incoccia C, Carlesimo GA. Evidence-based practice recommendations for memory rehabilitation. Eur J Phys Rehab Med. 2011;47:149–75.
    1. Cicerone KD, Langenbahn DM, Braden C, Malee JF, Kalmar K, Fraas M, et al. Evidence-based cognitive rehabilitation: updated review of the literature from 2003 through 2008. Arch Phys Med Rehab. 2011;92:519–30. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2010.11.015.
    1. Manly T, Evans JJ, Fish J, Gracey F, Bateman A. Cognitive rehabilitation following traumatic brain injury. In: Levin HS, Shum DHK, Chan RCK, editors. Understanding traumatic brain injury: current research and future directions. New York: Oxford University Press; 2014. pp. 215–34.
    1. Boman IL, Lindberg Stenvall C, Hemmingsson H, Bartfai A. A training apartment with a set of electronic memory aids for patients with cognitive problems. Scand J Occup Ther. 2010;17:140–8. doi: 10.3109/11038120902875144.
    1. de Joode E, Proot I, Slegers K, van Heugten C, Verhey F, van Boxtel M. The use of standard calendar software by individuals with acquired brain injury and cognitive complaints: a mixed methods study. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2012;7:389–98. doi: 10.3109/17483107.2011.644623.
    1. Kim HJ, Burke DT, Dowds MM, Boone KA, Park GJ. Electronic memory aids for outpatient brain injury: follow-up findings. Brain Inj. 2000;14:187–96. doi: 10.1080/026990500120844.
    1. Kirsch NL, Shenton M, Rowan J. A generic, “in house”, alphanumeric paging system for prospective activity impairments after TBI. Brain Inj. 2004;18:725–34. doi: 10.1080/02699050310001646161.
    1. Lemoncello R, Sohlberg MM, Fickas S, Prideaux J. A randomized controlled crossover trial evaluating television assisted prompting (TAP) for adults with acquired brain injury. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2011;21:825–46. doi: 10.1080/09602011.2011.618661.
    1. van den Broek MD, Downes J, Johnson Z, Dayus B, Hilton N. Evaluation of an electronic memory aid. Brain Inj. 2000;14:455–62. doi: 10.1080/026990500120556.
    1. de Joode E, van Heugten CM, Verhey F, van Boxtel M. Efficacy and usability of assistive technology for patients with cognitive deficits: a systematic review. Clin Rehabil. 2010;24:701–14. doi: 10.1177/0269215510367551.
    1. Fish J, Evans JJ, Nimmo M, Martin E, Kersel D, Bateman A, Wilson BA, Manly T. Rehabilitation of executive dysfunction following brain injury: content-free cueing improves everyday prospective memory performance. Neuropsychologia. 2007;45:1318–30. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.09.015.
    1. Ownsworth TL, McFarland K. Memory remediation in long-term acquired brain injury: two approaches to diary training. Brain Inj. 1999;13:605–26. doi: 10.1080/026990599121340.
    1. Das Nair R, Lincoln NB. Evaluation of rehabilitation of memory in neurological disabilities (ReMIND): a randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil. 2012;26:894–903. doi: 10.1177/0269215511435424.
    1. Radomski MV, Anheluk M, Bartzen MP, Zola J. Effectiveness of interventions to address cognitive impairments and improve occupational performance after traumatic brain injury: a systematic review. Am J Occup Ther. 2016. doi:10.5014/ajot.2016.020776.
    1. Sherer M, Boake C, Levin E, Silver BV, Ringholz G, High WM. Characteristics of impaired awareness after traumatic brain injury. J Int Neuropsych Soc. 1998;4:380–7.
    1. Fleming JM, Strong J, Ashton R. Self-awareness of deficits in adults with traumatic brain injury: how best to measure? Brain Inj. 1996;10:1–16. doi: 10.1080/026990596124674.
    1. Fleming JM, Ownsworth TL. A review of awareness interventions in brain injury rehabilitation. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2006;16:474–500. doi: 10.1080/09602010500505518.
    1. Ownsworth T, Fleming J, Desbois J, Strong J, Kuipers PIM. A metacognitive contextual intervention to enhance error awareness and functional outcome following traumatic brain injury: a single-case experimental design. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2006;12:54–63. doi: 10.1017/S135561770606005X.
    1. Ownsworth T, Quinn H, Fleming J, Kendall M, Shum D. Error self-regulation following traumatic brain injury: a single case study evaluation of metacognitive skills training and behavioural practice interventions. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2010;20:59–80. doi: 10.1080/09602010902949223.
    1. Schmidt J, Fleming J, Ownsworth T, Lannin NA. Video feedback on functional task performance improves self-awareness after traumatic brain injury: a randomized controlled trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2013;27:316–24. doi: 10.1177/1545968312469838.
    1. Wilson B, Emslie H, Foley J, Shiel A, Watson P, Hawkins K, et al. Cambridge Prospective Memory Test (CAMPROMPT) manual. Oxford: Harcourt Assessment; 2005.
    1. Borelli B. The assessment, monitoring, and enhancement of treatment fidelity in public health clinical trials. J Public Health Dent. 2011;71:s52–63. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-7325.2011.00233.x.
    1. Man DWK, Fleming J, Hohaus L, Shum D. Development of the Brief Assessment of Prospective Memory (BAPM) for use with traumatic brain injury populations. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2011;21:884–98. doi: 10.1080/09602011.2011.627270.
    1. Tate R, Hodgkinson A, Veerabangsa A, Maggiotto S. Measuring psychosocial recovery after traumatic brain injury: psychometric properties of a new scale. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 1999;14:543–57. doi: 10.1097/00001199-199912000-00003.
    1. Tate R, Simpson G, Lane-Brown A, Soo C, de Wolf A, Whiting D. Sydney Psychosocial Reintegration Scale (SPRS-2): meeting the challenge of measuring participation in neurological conditions. Aust Psychol. 2012;47:20–32. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-9544.2011.00060.x.
    1. Fleming J, Riley L, Gill H, Gullo MJ, Strong J, Shum D. Predictors of prospective memory in adults with traumatic brain injury. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2008;14:823–31. doi: 10.1017/S1355617708080971.
    1. Sherer M, Bergloff P, Boake C, High WM, Levin E. The Awareness Questionnaire: factor structure and internal consistency. Brain Inj. 1998;12:63–8. doi: 10.1080/026990598122863.
    1. Sherer M, Bergloff P, Boake C, Levin E, High W, Gollaher K. Factor structure of the awareness questionnaire. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 1997;12:403–4. doi: 10.1093/arclin/12.4.403a.
    1. Tate RL. Assessing support needs for people with traumatic brain injury: the care and needs scale (CANS) Brain Inj. 2004;18:445–60. doi: 10.1080/02699050310001641183.
    1. Soo C, Tate RL, Aird V, Allaous J, Browne S, Carr B, Coulston C, Diffley L, Gurka J, Hummell J. Validity and responsiveness of the care and needs scale for assessing support needs after traumatic brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2010;91:905–12. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2009.11.033.
    1. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang A, Buchner A. G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods. 2007;39:175–91. doi: 10.3758/BF03193146.
    1. Ownsworth T, Fleming J, Tate R, Shum D, Griffin J, Schmidt J, Lane-Brown A, Kendall M, Chevignard M. Do people with severe traumatic brain injury benefit from making errors? A study protocol for a randomized controlled trial of the efficacy of error-based and errorless learning training. Trials. 2013;14:369.1–8. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-14-369.
    1. Maylor EA, Darby RJ, Logie RH, Della Sala S, Smith G. Prospective memory across the lifespan. In: Graf P, Ohta N, editors. Lifespan development of human memory. Cambridge: MIT Press; 2002. pp. 235–56.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe