Suppr超能文献

痴呆症的验证疗法。

Validation therapy for dementia.

作者信息

Neal M, Briggs M

机构信息

Nursing Directorate, Leeds Community and Mental Health NHS Teaching Trust, The Mansion, Tongue Lane, Leeds, West Yorkshire, UK, LS 6 4QB.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000(2):CD001394. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001394.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Validation therapy is a "therapy for communicating with old-old people who are diagnosed as having Alzheimer's disease and related dementia". The approach was developed by Naomi Feil between 1963 and 1980. She classifies individuals with cognitive impairment as having one of four stages on a continuum of dementia: these stages are Malorientation, Time Confusion, Repetitive Motion and Vegetation. The benefits of Validation therapy for patients are reported by Feil as restoration of self worth, minimisation of the the degree to which patients withdraw from the outside world, promotion of communication and interaction with other people, reduction of stress and anxiety, stimulation of dormant potential, help in resolving unfinished life tasks, facilitation of independent living for as long as possible. These benefits are highly desirable and Validation therapy but there is a need to show them on the basis of substantive research yielding strong evidence across a number of well designed studies. The potential number of people that might benefit from the implementation of Validation therapy is considerable given the increasing incidence of dementia.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of using validation therapy with people diagnosed as having senile dementia of the Alzheimer's type, other forms of dementia, or cognitive impairment.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register was searched by the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Group Coordinator and relevant references were forwarded to the primary reviewer. The reviewers carried out independent searches of the following electronic databases - MEDLINE, EMBASE, Eureka, CINAHL, PSYCLIT, RLIN, SIGLE and SOCIOFILE. The following key terms were used in searches; validation-therapy, dementia, cognitive impairmnent, communication, and random*-control*. An author search using Feil and Naomi was also carried out. Personal contact was made with the Validation Institute, Cleveland, Ohio USA and unpublished studies were sought by direct contact with the relevant authors, or institutions. Key individuals who might provide further information regarding validation therapy were contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised controlled trials examining Validation therapy as an intervention for dementia were considered for inclusion in review. The criteria for inclusion/exclusion comprised systematic assessment of the quality of study design and the risk of bias, using a standard data extraction form. Outcome measures of cognitive and/or behavioural change were required.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted independently by both reviewers, using a previously tested data extraction form. Authors were contacted for data not provided in the papers. Psychological scales measuring cognitive and behavioural changes were examined. Subcategory analysis was performed due to the diversity of the scales and the inability to combine data across studies.

MAIN RESULTS

Only three studies were identifed that potentially met the inclusion criteria and only two small studies were able to be obtained. The Peoples 1982 study was not obtainable through a British Library loan because the cost was prohibitive. Data from 2 studies were entered using MetaView - Robb 1986, Toseland et al 1997, incorporating data on a total of 87 patients (32 in the experimental group, and 55 in the control groups (usual care 34 and social contact 21)). It was not possible to pool the data from the two included studies, and therefore, subcategory analyses were carried out. The analysis of the data failed to reveal statistically significant results although there were trends toward favouring validation therapy for some outcomes. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)

摘要

背景

确认疗法是一种“用于与被诊断患有阿尔茨海默病及相关痴呆症的高龄老人进行沟通的疗法”。该方法由内奥米·费尔在1963年至1980年间研发。她将认知障碍患者在痴呆连续体上分为四个阶段之一:这些阶段分别是定向障碍、时间混乱、重复动作和植物状态。费尔报告称,确认疗法对患者的益处包括恢复自我价值、尽量减少患者与外界隔绝的程度、促进与他人的沟通和互动、减轻压力和焦虑、激发潜在能力、帮助解决未完成的生活任务、尽可能促进独立生活。这些益处非常值得追求,但需要通过大量精心设计的研究得出的实质性研究证据来证明。鉴于痴呆症发病率不断上升,可能从实施确认疗法中受益的人数相当可观。

目的

评估对被诊断患有阿尔茨海默型老年性痴呆、其他形式痴呆或认知障碍的人使用确认疗法的有效性。

检索策略

Cochrane痴呆与认知障碍小组协调员检索了Cochrane对照试验注册库,并将相关参考文献转发给主要综述作者。综述作者独立检索了以下电子数据库——MEDLINE、EMBASE、Eureka、CINAHL、PSYCLIT、RLIN、SIGLE和SOCIOFILE。检索中使用了以下关键词;确认疗法、痴呆、认知障碍、沟通和随机对照。还进行了以费尔和内奥米为作者的检索。与美国俄亥俄州克利夫兰的确认疗法研究所进行了个人联系,并通过直接联系相关作者或机构来寻找未发表的研究。联系了可能提供有关确认疗法更多信息的关键人物。

纳入标准

所有将确认疗法作为痴呆干预措施的随机对照试验(RCT)和半随机对照试验均被考虑纳入综述。纳入/排除标准包括使用标准数据提取表对研究设计质量和偏倚风险进行系统评估。需要认知和/或行为改变的结局指标。

数据收集与分析

两位综述作者使用预先测试的数据提取表独立提取数据。就论文中未提供的数据与作者进行了联系。检查了测量认知和行为变化的心理量表。由于量表的多样性以及无法合并不同研究的数据,因此进行了亚组分析。

主要结果

仅确定了三项可能符合纳入标准的研究,且仅获得了两项小型研究。1982年皮普尔斯的研究因费用过高无法通过大英图书馆借阅获得。使用MetaView录入了两项研究的数据——罗布1986年、托斯兰德等人1997年的研究,总共纳入了87名患者的数据(实验组32名,对照组55名(常规护理34名和社交接触21名))。无法合并两项纳入研究的数据,因此进行了亚组分析。数据分析未显示出具有统计学意义的结果,尽管在某些结局方面有支持确认疗法的趋势。(摘要截断)

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验