Computerised cognitive training (CCT) is an increasingly popular intervention for people experiencing cognitive symptoms. This systematic review evaluated the evidence for CCT in adults with acquired brain injury (ABI), focusing on how outcome measures used reflect efficacy across components of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Database searches were conducted of studies investigating CCT to treat cognitive symptoms in adult ABI. Scientific quality was rated using the PEDro-P and RoBiNT Scales. Ninety-six studies met the criteria. Most studies examined outcomes using measures of mental functions (93/96, 97%); fewer studies included measures of activities/participation (41/96, 43%) or body structures (8/96, 8%). Only 14 studies (15%) provided Level 1 evidence (randomised controlled trials with a PEDro-P score ≥ 6/10), with these studies suggesting strong evidence for CCT improving processing speed in multiple sclerosis (MS) and moderate evidence for improving memory in MS and brain tumour populations. There is a large body of research examining the efficacy of CCT, but relatively few Level 1 studies and evidence is largely limited to body function outcomes. The routine use of outcome measures of activities/participation would provide more meaningful evidence for the efficacy of CCT. The use of body structure outcome measures (e.g., neuroimaging) is a newly emerging area, with potential to increase understanding of mechanisms of action for CCT.

Fabry disease is an X-linked lysosomal storage disorder which can result in renal, cardiac, and cerebrovascular disease. Patients are at increased risk of stroke and neuroimaging studies note cerebrovascular pathology. This study provides a cognitive profile of a cohort of individuals with Fabry disease and investigates the impact of pain, age, renal, cardiac, and cerebrovascular functioning on cognition and psychological functioning. Seventeen Fabry patients (12 males) with ages ranging 25 to 60 years (M = 46.6+11.8), and 15 age-matched healthy controls (M = 46.2+12.7) were administered a comprehensive neuropsychological battery. Fabry males demonstrated slower speed of information processing, reduced performance on measures of executive functions (verbal generation, reasoning, problem solving, perseveration), were more likely to show clinically significant reductions, and were more likely to report symptoms of anxiety and depression. Conversely, Fabry females performed at a similar level to controls. Correlational analyses indicated a link between cognitive and clinical measures of disease severity.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Good assessment is an essential component of effective patient management. Yet the sheer volume of available assessment instruments presents a barrier for the clinician or researcher to (a) be knowledgeable about suitable measures and (b) keep up-to-date with new measures that are published. In order to create a resource of currently-used measures, we conducted a systematic review of assessment tools used in the research literature on traumatic brain injury (TBI). METHODS: We used two electronic databases (Medline and PsycINFO) to identify full-length, English-language articles published between 2000 and 2012 in which outcome in adults with TBI was assessed with behavioural tests or questionnaires. RESULTS: The searches yielded 5,735 articles and after deletion of duplicates (n = 1,383) and articles not meeting selection criteria (n = 1,759), 2,593 articles were further examined. The articles contained 910 behavioural instruments, with a final set of 728 unique instruments. Each instrument was classified against the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Half of the instruments (n = 370, 50.8%) evaluated the mental functions domain of the ICF body functions component, with a substantially smaller proportion (n = 64, 8.8%) examining specific motor-sensory and other body functions. Instruments also covered domains of activities/participation (n = 109, 15.0%), environmental factors (n = 22, 3.0%) and personal factors (n = 36, 4.9%). A substantial number of scales (n = 93, 12.8%) were multidimensional across the body function domains (n = 32), as well as the functioning and disability part of the ICF (n = 60). The remaining 5% of instruments addressed concepts not covered by the ICF, including quality of life (n = 19, 2.6%) and rehabilitation process tools (such as therapeutic alliance). The 728 instruments were listed and more than 70 of the most common, spread across 20 domains, were highlighted. CONCLUSION: These data provide a comprehensive and up-to-date resource that gives the researcher or clinician a very large selection of assessment instruments covering the major areas of function pertinent to TBI.