Aim. Cognitive rehabilitation is of interest after paediatric acquired brain injury (ABI). The present systematic review examined studies investigating cognitive rehabilitation interventions for children with ABI, while focusing on identifying effective components. Components were categorized as (1) metacognition and/or strategy use, (2) (computerized) drill-based exercises, and (3) external aids. Methods. The databases PubMed (including MEDLINE), Psyclnfo, and CINAHL were searched until 22nd June 2017. Additionally, studies were identified through cross-referencing and by consulting experts in the field. Results. A total of 20 articles describing 19 studies were included. Metacognition/strategy use trainings (five studies) mainly improved psychosocial functioning. Drill-based interventions (six studies) improved performance on tasks similar to training tasks. Interventions combining these two components (six studies) benefited cognitive and psychosocial functioning. External aids (two studies) improved everyday memory. No studies combined external aids with drill-based interventions or all three components. Conclusion. Available evidence suggests that multi-component rehabilitation, e.g. combining metacognition/strategy use and drill-based training is most promising, as it can lead to improvements in both cognitive and psychosocial functioning of children with ABI. Intervention setting and duration may play a role. Conclusions remain tentative due to small sample sizes of included studies heterogeneity regarding outcome measures, intervention and therapist variables, and patient characteristics. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699052.2018.1458335
MULTIFILE
OBJECTIVE: To conduct a randomized controlled trial and compare the effects on cancer survivors' quality of life in a 12-week group-based multidisciplinary self-management rehabilitation program, combining physical training (twice weekly) and cognitive-behavioral training (once weekly) with those of a 12-week group-based physical training (twice weekly). In addition, both interventions were compared with no intervention.METHODS: Participants (all cancer types, medical treatment completed > or = 3 months ago) were randomly assigned to multidisciplinary rehabilitation (n = 76) or physical training (n = 71). The nonintervention comparison group consisted of 62 patients on a waiting list. Quality of life was measured using the RAND-36. The rehabilitation groups were measured at baseline, after rehabilitation, and 3-month follow-up, and the nonintervention group was measured at baseline and 12 weeks later.RESULTS: The effects of multidisciplinary rehabilitation did not outperform those of physical training in role limitations due to emotional problem (primary outcome) or any other domains of quality of life (all p > .05). Compared with no intervention, participants in both rehabilitation groups showed significant and clinically relevant improvements in role limitations due to physical problem (primary outcome; effect size (ES) = 0.66), and in physical functioning (ES = 0.48), vitality (ES = 0.54), and health change (ES = 0.76) (all p < .01).CONCLUSIONS: Adding a cognitive-behavioral training to group-based self-management physical training did not have additional beneficial effects on cancer survivors' quality of life. Compared with the nonintervention group, the group-based self-management rehabilitation improved cancer survivors' quality of life.
We tested the effects on problem-solving, anxiety and depression of 12-week group-based self-management cancer rehabilitation, combining comprehensive physical training (PT) and cognitive-behavioural problem-solving training (CBT), compared with PT. We expected that PT + CBT would outperform PT in improvements in problem-solving (Social Problem-Solving Inventory-Revised (SPSI-R)), anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)), and that more anxious and/or depressed participants would benefit most from adding CBT to PT. Cancer survivors (aged 48.8 ± 10.9 years, all cancer types, medical treatment completed) were randomly assigned to PT + CBT (n = 76) or PT (n = 71). Measurement occasions were: before and post-rehabilitation (12 weeks), 3- and 9-month follow-up. A non-randomised usual care comparison group (UCC) (n = 62) was measured at baseline and after 12 weeks. Longitudinal intention-to-treat analyses showed no differential pattern in change between PT + CBT and PT. Post-rehabilitation, participants in PT and PT + CBT reported within-group improvements in problem-solving (negative problem orientation; p < 0.01), anxiety (p < 0.001) and depression (p < 0.001), which were maintained at 3- and 9-month follow-up (p < 0.05). Compared with UCC post-rehabilitation, PT and PT + CBT only improved in anxiety (p < 0.05). CBT did not add to the effects of PT and had no extra benefits for higher distressed participants. PT was feasible and sufficient for durably reducing cancer survivors' anxiety.
