Feasibility, Acceptability, and Impact of a self-guided e-learning Memory and Brain Health Promotion Program for Healthy Older Adults

D’Amico, Danielle; Yusupov, Iris; Zhu, Lynn; Lass, Jordan; Plunkett, Cindy; Levine, Brian; Troyer, Angela K.; Vandermorris, Susan

doi:10.1080/07317115.2022.2088325

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The program was acceptable to the target group, with 97.4% (150/154) of participants reporting that they would recommend it to someone else and 83.1% (128/154) of participants providing positive evaluations across all aspects of the program evaluated. This was similar to the end-of-course ratings in another web-based memory program for older adults [27]. We also asked participants to rate various aspects within each module, finding that the majority of evaluations were positive across all aspects and modules.…”

Section: Principal Findingssupporting

confidence: 62%

“…Although the attrition rate is greater than that usually observed for in-person interventions [31], it is comparable with that observed for other web-based courses with set time frames [45,46]. A similar web-based memory intervention for older adults demonstrated less attrition [27]; however, timelines for completing the intervention were not fixed, suggesting that more flexibility around completion times may improve retention. Greater attrition was observed for the 3-month booster session, which only 21.8% (68/312) of the participants completed.…”

Section: Principal Findingssupporting

confidence: 51%

“…Attrition may be reduced by providing more information to participants before registration for the intervention (as many participants withdrew before giving consent) and providing accurate information regarding the duration of modules, given that the length required was a commonly suggested improvement. More flexibility around time to complete the course may also assist, given the lower attrition rate observed in another web-based memory study without a fixed time frame [27]. Nevertheless, relatively high levels of attrition may be par for the course for fixed-length web-based studies, suggesting that such studies need to account for this by recruiting and screening many more participants than will complete the course.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Examination of the Feasibility, Acceptability, and Efficacy of the Online Personalised Training in Memory Strategies for Everyday Program for Older Adults: Single-Arm Pre-Post Trial

Pike¹,

Moller²,

Bryant³

et al. 2023

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Memory strategy training for older adults helps maintain and improve cognitive health but is traditionally offered face-to-face, which is resource intensive, limits accessibility, and is challenging during a pandemic. Web-based interventions, such as the Online Personalised Training in Memory Strategies for Everyday (OPTIMiSE) program, may overcome such barriers. Objective We report on OPTIMiSE’s feasibility, acceptability, and efficacy. Methods Australians aged ≥60 years reporting subjective cognitive decline participated in this single-arm pre-post web-based intervention. OPTIMiSE is a 6-module web-based program offered over 8-weeks with a 3-month booster. It has a problem-solving approach to memory issues, focusing on psychoeducation about memory and aging, knowledge and practice of compensatory memory strategies, and personalized content related to individual priorities. We examined the feasibility (recruitment, attrition, and data collection), acceptability (recommendation to others, suggestions for improvement, and withdrawal reasons), and efficacy (change in goal satisfaction, strategy knowledge and use, self-reported memory, memory satisfaction and knowledge, and mood; thematic content analysis of the most significant change; and the application of knowledge and strategies in daily life) of OPTIMiSE. Results OPTIMiSE was feasible, demonstrated by strong interest (633 individuals screened), a satisfactory level of attrition (158/312, 50.6%), and minimal missing data from those completing the intervention. It was acceptable, with 97.4% (150/154) of participants agreeing they would recommend OPTIMiSE, the main suggestion for improvement being more time to complete modules, and withdrawal reasons similar to those in in-person interventions. OPTIMiSE was also efficacious, with linear mixed-effects analyses revealing improvements, of moderate to large effect sizes, across all primary outcomes (all P<.001): memory goal satisfaction (Cohen d after course=1.24; Cohen d at 3-month booster=1.64), strategy knowledge (Cohen d after course=0.67; Cohen d at 3-month booster=0.72) and use (Cohen d after course=0.79; Cohen d at 3-month booster=0.90), self-reported memory (Cohen d after course=0.80; Cohen d at 3-month booster=0.83), memory satisfaction (Cohen d after course=1.25; Cohen d at 3-month booster=1.29) and knowledge (Cohen d after course=0.96; Cohen d at 3-month booster=0.26), and mood (Cohen d after course=−0.35; nonsignificant Cohen d at booster). Furthermore, the most significant changes reported by participants (strategy use, improvements in daily life, reduced concern about memory, confidence and self-efficacy, and sharing and shame busting with others) reflected the course objectives and were consistent with themes arising from previous in-person interventions. At the 3-month booster, many participants reported continued implementation of knowledge and strategies in their daily lives. Conclusions This feasible, acceptable, and efficacious web-based program has the potential to enable access to evidence-based memory interventions for older adults worldwide. Notably, the changes in knowledge, beliefs, and strategy use continued beyond the initial program. This is particularly important for supporting the growing number of older adults living with cognitive concerns. Trial Registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12620000979954; https://tinyurl.com/34cdantv International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) RR2-10.3233/ADR-200251

show abstract

Section: Principal Findingssupporting

confidence: 62%