Intensive and standard group-based treatment for persons with social communication difficulties after an acquired brain injury: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Silje Merethe Hansen, Jan Stubberud, Marianne Hjertstedt, Melanie Kirmess, Silje Merethe Hansen, Jan Stubberud, Marianne Hjertstedt, Melanie Kirmess

Abstract

Introduction: Social communication difficulties (SCDs) occur frequently after an acquired brain injury (ABI) and have disabling consequences, but effective interventions are scant. Group Interactive Structured Treatment (GIST) is a holistic group treatment targeting SCD that has received empirical support.

Objective: To determine the efficacy of two GIST protocols, standard GIST and a newly developed intensive GIST, comparing standard GIST results to a wait-list control group (WL), as well as to intensive GIST received by participants following WL. The within subject results for WL and intensive GIST will also be examined.

Methods and analysis: Sixty adults (18-75 years) with SCD after ABI will be recruited for this randomised controlled trial. Standard GIST (n=30) will be delivered via outpatient sessions for 2.5 hours once per week for 12 weeks, plus one initial orientation session. Participants will be assessed at preintervention and postintervention and at 3-month and 6-month follow-ups (T1-T4). Intensive GIST (n=30) participants will be admitted to an inpatient rehabilitation unit for 4 weeks (two times 3 days/week, two times 4 days/week) and receive full-day sessions each week. Those participants will complete four assessments (T1-T4) in 12-week intervals as part of WL, assessments preintensive and postintensive GIST and at 3-month and 6-month follow-ups (T4-T7). The primary outcome measure is the La Trobe Questionnaire (self-report). Secondary outcome measures include the Profile of Pragmatic Impairment in Communication, a test of emotion recognition, the Goal Attainment Scale and questionnaires addressing social, emotional and cognitive functions, self-efficacy and quality of life.

Ethics and dissemination: Results will be communicated through international, peer-reviewed and popular science journals and presentations at scientific conferences. The study is approved by the Regional Committees for Medical and Health Research Ethics Norway (2017/1360). The trial will be conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and reported in accordance with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials 2010 statement and Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials recommendations.

Trial registration number: NCT03636399.

Keywords: GIST; brain injury; cognitive rehabilitation; evidence-based; group treatment; social competence.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
CONSORT 2010 flow diagram. CONSORT, Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials; GIST, Group Interactive Structured Treatment.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Overview of the randomisation process. GIST, Group Interactive Structured Treatment; WL. wait-list control group.

References

    1. Cicerone KD, Langenbahn DM, Braden C, et al. . Evidence-Based cognitive rehabilitation: updated review of the literature from 2003 through 2008. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2011;92:519–30. 10.1016/j.apmr.2010.11.015
    1. Davis GA. Cognitive pragmatics of language disorders in adults. Semin Speech Lang 2007;28:111–21. 10.1055/s-2007-970569
    1. Finch E, Copley A, Cornwell P, et al. . Systematic review of behavioral interventions targeting social communication difficulties after traumatic brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2016;97:1352–65. 10.1016/j.apmr.2015.11.005
    1. Haskins EC, Cicerone K KMD-O, et al. . Cognitive rehabilitation manual. translating evidence-based recommendations into practice. Virginia USA: ACRM publishing, 2012-2014.
    1. McDonald S, Gowland A, Randall R, et al. . Cognitive factors underpinning poor expressive communication skills after traumatic brain injury: theory of mind or executive function? Neuropsychology 2014;28:801–11. 10.1037/neu0000089
    1. Baron-Cohen S, Wheelwright S, Hill J, et al. . The "Reading the Mind in the Eyes" Test revised version: a study with normal adults, and adults with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 2001;42:241–51. 10.1111/1469-7610.00715
    1. Premack D, Woodruff G. Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind? Behav Brain Sci 1978;1:515–26. 10.1017/S0140525X00076512
    1. CASLPO Preferred practice guideline for Cognitive-Communication disorders College of audiologists and speech-language pathologists of Ontario, 2002. Available:
    1. Martin I, McDonald S. Weak coherence, no theory of mind, or executive dysfunction? solving the puzzle of pragmatic language disorders. Brain Lang 2003;85:451–66. 10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00070-1
    1. Hewetson R, Cornwell P, Shum D. In Hewetson R, Cornwell P, Shum D, eds Social participation following right hemisphere stroke: influence of a cognitive-communication disorder, 2017.
    1. Olver JH, Ponsford JL, Curran CA. Outcome following traumatic brain injury: a comparison between 2 and 5 years after injury. Brain Inj 1996;10:841–8. 10.1080/026990596123945
    1. Douglas JM, Knox L, De Maio C, et al. . Effectiveness of Communication-specific coping intervention for adults with traumatic brain injury: preliminary results. Neuropsychological rehabilitation 2016;1.
    1. Tompkins CA. Rehabilitation for cognitive-communication disorders in right hemisphere brain damage. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2011;93.
    1. Lehman Blake M, Blake ML. Perspectives on treatment for communication deficits associated with right hemisphere brain damage. Am J Speech Lang Pathol 2007;16:331–42.
    1. Nijsse B, Spikman JM, Visser-Meily JMA, et al. . Social cognition impairments are associated with behavioural changes in the long term after stroke. PLoS One 2019;14:e0213725–e25. 10.1371/journal.pone.0213725
    1. Galski T, Tompkins C, Johnston MV. Competence in discourse as a measure of social integration and quality of life in persons with traumatic brain injury. Brain Inj 1998;12:769–82. 10.1080/026990598122160
    1. Dahlberg C, Hawley L, Morey C, et al. . Social communication skills in persons with post-acute traumatic brain injury: three perspectives. Brain Inj 2006;20:425–35. 10.1080/02699050600664574
    1. Hawley LA, Newman JK. Group interactive structured treatment – GIST: for social competence. An evidence based program to develop social competence for individuals with traumatic brain injury or other Cogntive deficits. Denver, USA 2012.
    1. Cicerone KD, Goldin Y, Ganci K, et al. . Evidence-Based cognitive rehabilitation: systematic review of the literature from 2009 through 2014. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2019;100:1515–33. 10.1016/j.apmr.2019.02.011
    1. Togher L, Wiseman-Hakes C, Douglas J, et al. . INCOG recommendations for management of cognition following traumatic brain injury, part IV: cognitive communication. J Head Trauma Rehabil 2014;29:353–68. 10.1097/HTR.0000000000000071
    1. Dahlberg CA, Cusick CP, Hawley LA, et al. . Treatment efficacy of social communication skills training after traumatic brain injury: a randomized treatment and deferred treatment controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2007;88:1561–73. 10.1016/j.apmr.2007.07.033
    1. Westerhof-Evers HJ, Visser-Keizer AC, Fasotti L, et al. . Effectiveness of a treatment for impairments in social cognition and emotion regulation (T-ScEmo) after traumatic brain injury: a randomized controlled trial. J Head Trauma Rehabil 2017;32:296–307. 10.1097/HTR.0000000000000332
    1. Gabbatore I, Sacco K, Angeleri R, et al. . Cognitive pragmatic treatment: a rehabilitative program for traumatic brain injury individuals. J Head Trauma Rehabil 2015;30:E14–E28. 10.1097/HTR.0000000000000087
    1. Copley A, Smith K, Savill K, et al. . Does metacognitive strategy instruction improve impaired receptive cognitive-communication skills following acquired brain injury? Brain Inj 2015;29:1309–16. 10.3109/02699052.2015.1043343
    1. Harrison-Felix C, Newman JK, Hawley L, et al. . Social competence treatment after traumatic brain injury: a multicenter, randomized controlled trial of interactive group treatment versus noninteractive treatment. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2018;99:2131–42. 10.1016/j.apmr.2018.05.030
    1. Braden C, Hawley L, Newman J, et al. . Social communication skills group treatment: a feasibility study for persons with traumatic brain injury and comorbid conditions. Brain Inj 2010;24:1298–310. 10.3109/02699052.2010.506859
    1. Hansen SM, Hjertstedt M, Kirmess M, et al. . Intensiv gruppebehandling for sosiale kommunikasjonsvansker: et pilot Prosjekt. Norsk tidsskrift for logopedi 2019;65:24–34.
    1. Holleman M, Vink M, Nijland R, et al. . Effects of intensive neuropsychological rehabilitation for acquired brain injury. Neuropsychol Rehabil 2018;28:649–62. 10.1080/09602011.2016.1210013
    1. Raymer AM, Beeson P, Holland A, et al. . Translational research in aphasia: from neuroscience to neurorehabilitation. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 2008;51:S259–75.
    1. Brady MC, Kelly H, Godwin J, et al. . Speech and language therapy for aphasia following stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016;24 10.1002/14651858.CD000425.pub4
    1. McDonald S, Togher L, Tate R, et al. . A randomised controlled trial evaluating a brief intervention for deficits in recognising emotional prosody following severe ABI. Neuropsychol Rehabil 2013;23:267–86. 10.1080/09602011.2012.751340
    1. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, et al. . Consort 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. J Clin Epidemiol 2010;63:834–40. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.02.005
    1. Baber N. International Conference on harmonisation of technical requirements for registration of pharmaceuticals for human use (ICH). Br J Clin Pharmacol 1994;37:401–4. 10.1111/j.1365-2125.1994.tb05705.x
    1. Chan A-W, Tetzlaff JM, Gøtzsche PC, et al. . Spirit 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials. BMJ: British Medical Journal 2013.
    1. Douglas JM, O'Flaherty CA, Snow PC. Measuring perception of communicative ability: the development and evaluation of the La Trobe communication questionnaire. Aphasiology 2000;14:251–68. 10.1080/026870300401469
    1. Sherer M, Bergloff P, Boake C, et al. . The awareness questionnaire: factor structure and internal consistency. Brain Inj 1998;12:63–8. 10.1080/026990598122863
    1. Evans CC, Sherer M, Nick TG, et al. . Early impaired self-awareness, depression, and subjective well-being following traumatic brain injury. J Head Trauma Rehabil 2005;20:488–500. 10.1097/00001199-200511000-00002
    1. Haahr M. school of computer science and statistics at Trinity College, Dublin in Ireland, 1998-2019. Available: [Accessed 01.10.2018 2018].
    1. Douglas JM, Bracy CA, Snow PC. Measuring perceived communicative ability after traumatic brain injury: reliability and validity of the La Trobe communication questionnaire. J Head Trauma Rehabil 2007;22:31–8.
    1. Douglas JM, Bracy CA, Snow PC. Exploring the factor structure of the La Trobe communication questionnaire: insights into the nature of communication deficits following traumatic brain injury. Aphasiology 2007;21:1181–94. 10.1080/02687030600980950
    1. Linscott RJ, Knight RG, Godfrey HPD. Manual for the profile of pragmatic impairment in communication (PPIC): University of Otago, Dunedin, 2003.
    1. McGann W, Werven G, Douglas MM. Social competence and head injury: a practical approach. Brain Inj 1997;11:621–8. 10.1080/026990597123179
    1. Kiresuk TJ, Sherman RE. Goal attainment scaling: a general method for evaluating comprehensive community mental health programs. Community Ment Health J 1968;4:443–53. 10.1007/BF01530764
    1. Constantinidou F, Kennedy M. Traumatic Brain Injury in Adults : Papathanasiou I, Coppens P, Aphasia and related neurogenic communication disorders. 2nd ed USA: Jones and Bartlett Learning, 2017.
    1. Olsen A-K, Zakariassen E, Kaas AW, et al. . Først og helhetlig system for håndtering av akutte sykdommer og skader utenfor sykehus. NOU 2015;17.
    1. Douglas JM. Using the La Trobe communication questionnaire to measure perceived social communication ability in adolescents with traumatic brain injury. Brain Impairment 2010;11:171–82. 10.1375/brim.11.2.171
    1. Field A. Los Angeles: S, ed Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. 5th edition, 2018.
    1. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed Hillsdale, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum, 1988.
    1. Cunningham JA, Kypri K, McCambridge J. Exploratory randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of a waiting list control design. BMC Med Res Methodol 2013;13:150 10.1186/1471-2288-13-150
    1. Elliott SA, Brown JSL. What are we doing to waiting list controls? Behav Res Ther 2002;40:1047–52. 10.1016/S0005-7967(01)00082-1
    1. Schinka JA, Velicer WF, Weiner IB. Handbook of psychology: Vol. 2: research methods in psychology. New York: Wiley, 2003.
    1. Bach LJ, David AS. Self-awareness after acquired and traumatic brain injury. Neuropsychol Rehabil 2006;16:397–414. 10.1080/09602010500412830
    1. Krosnick JA. Survey research. Annu Rev Psychol 1999;50:537–67. 10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.537
    1. Wechsler D. Manual for the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence In: Antonio S, ed Corporation TP, 1999.
    1. Delis D, Kramer J, Kaplan E, et al. . California verbal learning test -. Second edition USA, 2000.
    1. Delis D, Kaplan E, Kramer J. Delis-Kaplan executive functioning system (D-KEFS. San Antonio, 2001.
    1. Wechsler D. Wechler adult intelligence Scale-. Fourth Edition San Antonio, 2008.
    1. Gioia G. Behavior rating inventory of executive function: professional manual, 2000.
    1. Willer B, Ottenbacher KJ, Coad ML. The community integration questionnaire. A comparative examination. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 1994;73:103–11. 10.1097/00002060-199404000-00006
    1. Schwarzer R, Jerusalem M. Generalized Self- Efficacy scale. Windsor, England: NFER-NELSON, 1995.
    1. Patrick DL, Danis M, Southerland LI, et al. . Quality of life following intensive care. J Gen Intern Med 1988;3:218–23. 10.1007/BF02596335
    1. Strand BH, Dalgard OS, Tambs K, et al. . Measuring the mental health status of the Norwegian population: a comparison of the instruments SCL-25, SCL-10, SCL-5 and MHI-5 (SF-36). Nord J Psychiatry 2003;57:113–8. 10.1080/08039480310000932

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren