Giaquinto Francesco, Iaia Marika, Rizzi Ezia, Macchitella Luigi, Romano Daniele Luigi, Tosi Giorgia, Angelelli Paola
Department of Experimental Medicine - Lab of Applied Psychology and Intervention - University of Salento, Lecce (LE), Italy.
Department of Psychology and Milan Center for Neuroscience (NeuroMi), University of Milano-Bicocca, Milano (MI), Italy.
J Alzheimers Dis. 2025 Jun;105(4):1252-1274. doi: 10.1177/13872877251334795. Epub 2025 May 13.
BackgroundThe prevalence of individuals living with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), Alzheimer's disease (AD), and other forms of dementia is globally increasing. Four out of nine international clinical guidelines recommend non-pharmacological cognitive interventions to enhance cognition, independence, and wellbeing. However, the effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation (CR) and cognitive training (CT) for individuals with MCI and AD and other forms of dementia is still debatable, often due to significant heterogeneity among studies.ObjectiveThis study aims to assess the effectiveness of CT and CR in these populations.MethodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a comprehensive literature search across databases including OVID, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus, identifying randomized controlled trials and non-randomized pre-post intervention studies. The Bayesian meta-analysis focused on pre-post changes in global cognition, quality of life, everyday functioning, and depression, avoiding comparisons with control groups to reduce heterogeneity (PROSPERO: CRD42022365038).ResultsThe search yielded 6075 results, with 40 studies meeting inclusion criteria, encompassing 50 independent trials. CT and people with AD and other dementias are the best represented intervention and population, respectively. CT was more effective in improving global cognition in individuals with AD and other dementias, and paper-and-pencil and face-to-face formats yielded greater benefits. The analysis showed a significant susceptibility to bias among the studies.ConclusionsLimitations in outcome measure (e.g., MMSE) suggest the need for more sensitive assessments, especially for MCI. Future research should explore broader aspects of wellbeing and investigate the potential of CR. Policymakers are encouraged to consider these findings when designing cognitive interventions for this population.
背景
轻度认知障碍(MCI)、阿尔茨海默病(AD)及其他形式痴呆症患者的数量在全球范围内呈上升趋势。九项国际临床指南中有四项推荐采用非药物认知干预措施来提高认知能力、增强独立性并改善健康状况。然而,认知康复(CR)和认知训练(CT)对MCI、AD及其他形式痴呆症患者的有效性仍存在争议,这通常是由于研究之间存在显著异质性。
目的
本研究旨在评估CT和CR对这些人群的有效性。
方法
遵循PRISMA指南,我们对包括OVID、MEDLINE、EMBASE和Scopus在内的多个数据库进行了全面的文献检索,识别随机对照试验和非随机干预前后研究。贝叶斯荟萃分析聚焦于全球认知、生活质量、日常功能和抑郁方面的干预前后变化,避免与对照组进行比较以减少异质性(PROSPERO:CRD42022365038)。
结果
检索共获得6075条结果,其中40项研究符合纳入标准,涵盖50项独立试验。CT以及AD和其他痴呆症患者分别是最具代表性的干预措施和人群。CT在改善AD和其他痴呆症患者的全球认知方面更有效,纸笔形式和面对面形式带来的益处更大。分析显示研究之间存在显著的偏倚易感性。
结论
结果测量(如MMSE)的局限性表明需要更敏感的评估,尤其是对MCI患者。未来的研究应探索健康状况的更广泛方面,并研究CR的潜力。鼓励政策制定者在为该人群设计认知干预措施时考虑这些发现。