A Randomized Controlled Trial of Assisted Intention Monitoring for the Rehabilitation of Executive Impairments Following Acquired Brain Injury

Gracey, Fergus; Fish, Jessica; Greenfield, Eve; Bateman, Andrew; Malley, Donna; Hardy, Gemma; Ingham, Jessica; Evans, Jonathan J.; Manly, Tom

doi:10.1177/1545968316680484

Cited by 28 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A total of 244 people with acquired brain injury were recruited and randomised across the studies. Five studies used a parallel group design [6][7][8][9][10] and one a crossover design 11 (Supplemental Appendix 5). Only one study 7 recruited people exclusively on an inpatient basis, and the remainder recruited from several settings.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A therapist delivered the intervention training in five studies. 6,[8][9][10][11] Training duration for the participants varied between studies, with the majority delivering multiple 30 minute sessions. Intervention fidelity was not addressed by any of the studies, meaning there was no reference to whether the intervention was delivered as intended and if this was assessed.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Three studies 6,8,11 used at least one measure of psychological function, assessing self-efficacy and depression, mood state, and anxiety and depression (Supplemental Appendix 8). However, no significant improvement was found in favour of the interventions.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A systematic review of personal smart technologies used to improve outcomes in adults with acquired brain injuries

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This review aimed to determine the effectiveness of personal smart technologies on outcomes in adults with acquired brain injury. Data sources: A systematic literature search was conducted on 30 May 2019. Twelve electronic databases, grey literature databases, PROSPERO, reference list and author citations were searched. Methods: Randomised controlled trials were included if personal smart technology was used to improve independence, goal attainment/function, fatigue or quality of life in adults with acquired brain injury. Data were extracted using a bespoke form and the TIDieR checklist. Studies were graded using the PEDro scale to assess quality of reporting. Meta-analysis was conducted across four studies. Results: Six studies met the inclusion criteria, generating a total of 244 participants. All studies were of high quality (PEDro ⩾ 6). Interventions included personal digital assistant, smartphone app, mobile phone messaging, Neuropage and an iPad. Reporting of intervention tailoring for individual needs was inconsistent. All studies measured goal attainment/function but none measured independence or fatigue. One study ( n = 42) reported a significant increase in memory-specific goal attainment ( p = 0.0001) and retrospective memory function ( p = 0.042) in favour of the intervention. Another study ( n = 8) reported a significant increase in social participation in favour of the intervention ( p = 0.01). However, our meta-analyses found no significant effect of personal smart technology on goal attainment, cognitive or psychological function. Conclusion: At present, there is insufficient evidence to support the clinical benefit of personal smart technologies to improve outcomes in acquired brain injury. Researchers need to conduct more randomised studies to evaluate these interventions and measure their potential effects/harms.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A systematic review of personal smart technologies used to improve outcomes in adults with acquired brain injuries

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although typically power calculations are conducted for trials, the primary objective of the MAPLES trial is to determine the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention. Based on our previous experience [ 50 , 51 ] approximately 20 participants per arm (a total of 60 participants) would provide a sufficient balance between determining feasibility and exploring potential mediators of outcome between the activity planning group and activity engagement group that can guide the development of a future larger-scale trial.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mood, Activity Participation, and Leisure Engagement Satisfaction (MAPLES): a randomised controlled pilot feasibility trial for low mood in acquired brain injury

Kusec

Murphy

Peers

et al. 2020

Pilot Feasibility Stud

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Acquired brain injury (ABI) affects approximately 79.3 million individuals annually and is linked with elevated rates of depression and low mood. Existing methods for treating depression in ABI have shown mixed efficacy. Behavioural activation (BA) is a potentially promising intervention. Its premise is that individuals with low mood avoid planning and engaging in activities due to low expectations of a positive outcome. Consequently, their exposure to positive reinforcement is reduced, exacerbating low mood. BA aims to break this cycle by encouraging activity planning and engagement. It is unknown whether cognitive demands of traditional BA may undermine efficacy in ABI. Here, we assess the feasibility and acceptability of two groups designed to increase activity engagement. In the activity planning group (traditional BA), the importance of meaningful and positive activity will be discussed and participants encouraged to plan/engage in activities in everyday life. The activity engagement group (experiential BA) instead focuses on engagement in positive experiences (crafts, games, discussion) within the group. The primary aims are to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of the two groups in ABI. A secondary aim is to explore relative efficacy of the groups compared to an equivalent period of waitlist controls. Method This study outlines a parallel-arm pilot feasibility trial for individuals with low mood and ABI that compares a traditional vs experiential BA group vs waitlist controls. Adults (≥ 18 years) will be recruited from local ABI services and randomised to condition. Feasibility and acceptability will be assessed via recruitment, retention, attendance and participant feedback. Groups will be compared (pre- and post-intervention and 1 month follow-up) by assessing self-reported activity engagement. Secondary outcomes include self-report measures of depression, anxiety, post-traumatic distress related to the ABI, motivation, participation and sense of control over one’s life. Ethics and dissemination The trial has been approved by the Health Research Authority of the NHS in the UK (East of England—Cambridge Central, REF 18/EE/0305). Results will inform future research on interventions for mood in ABI and be disseminated broadly via peer-reviewed journals, conference presentations and social media. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03874650 pre-results. Protocol version 2.1, March 5, 2019

show abstract

“…Although typically power calculations are conducted for trials, the primary objective of the MAPLES study is to determine the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention. Based on our previous experience [50,51] clients, the clinical staff will either 1) provide an invitation letter in person to a client that meets eligibility criteria or 2) post or email invitation letters to any client meeting eligibility criteria. The invitation letter will provide a brief overview of the study and its procedures and a summary of the two groups.…”

Section: Sample Sizementioning

confidence: 99%

Mood, Activity Participation, and Leisure Engagement Satisfaction (MAPLES): A randomised controlled feasibility study for low mood in acquired brain injury

Kusec

Murphy

Peers

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Acquired brain injury (ABI) affects approximately 79.3 million individuals annually and is linked with elevated rates of depression and low mood. Existing methods for treating depression in ABI have shown mixed efficacy. Behavioural Activation (BA) is a potentially promising intervention. Its premise is that individuals with low mood avoid planning and engaging in activities due to low expectations of a positive outcome. Consequently, their exposure to positive reinforcement is reduced, exacerbating low mood. BA aims to break this cycle by encouraging activity planning and engagement. It is unknown whether cognitive demands of traditional BA may undermine efficacy in ABI. Here we assess the feasibility and acceptability of two groups designed to increase activity engagement. In the Activity Planning Group (traditional BA) the importance of meaningful and positive activity will be discussed and participants encouraged to plan/engage in activities in everyday life. The Activity Engagement Group (experiential BA) instead focuses on engagement in positive experiences (crafts, games, discussion) within the group. The primary aims are to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of the two groups in ABI. A secondary aim is to explore relative efficacy of the groups compared to an equivalent period of waitlist controls. Method: This study outlines a parallel-arm feasibility pilot trial for individuals with low mood and ABI that compares a traditional vs experiential BA group vs. waitlist controls. Adults (>18 years) will be recruited from local ABI services and randomised to condition. Feasibility and acceptability will be assessed via recruitment, retention, attendance, and participant feedback. Groups will be compared (pre- and post-intervention and 1 month follow-up) by assessing self-reported activity engagement. Secondary outcomes include self-report measures of depression, anxiety, post-traumatic distress related to the ABI, motivation, participation, and sense of control over one’s life.Ethics and Dissemination: The trial has been approved by the Health Research Authority of the NHS in the UK (East of England – Cambridge Central, REF: 18/EE/0305). Results will inform future research on interventions for mood in ABI and be disseminated broadly via peer-reviewed journals, conference presentations, and social media.

show abstract

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Assisted Intention Monitoring for the Rehabilitation of Executive Impairments Following Acquired Brain Injury

Cited by 28 publications

References 36 publications

A systematic review of personal smart technologies used to improve outcomes in adults with acquired brain injuries

A systematic review of personal smart technologies used to improve outcomes in adults with acquired brain injuries

Mood, Activity Participation, and Leisure Engagement Satisfaction (MAPLES): a randomised controlled pilot feasibility trial for low mood in acquired brain injury

Mood, Activity Participation, and Leisure Engagement Satisfaction (MAPLES): A randomised controlled feasibility study for low mood in acquired brain injury

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About