4.5 Article

Cognitive intervention for community-dwelling older persons with memory problems: telemedicine versus face-to-face treatment

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GERIATRIC PSYCHIATRY
Volume 20, Issue 3, Pages 285-286

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/gps.1282

Keywords

cognitive intervention; dementia; memory problems; mild cognitive impairment; telemedicine; telepsychiatry

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Memory complaints and decline in cognitive function are common in the elederly. Cognitive intervention has been shown to be beneficial in Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, few community-based cognitive intervention programs are available in Hong Kong. The aim of this project is to examine and compare the feasibility, acceptability, and clinical outcome of a cognitive intervention program for older patients with mild cognitive impairment and mild dementia using telemedicine versus a conventional face-to-face method. Methods Community-dwelling older subjects with mild dementia or mild cognitive impairments were recruited from a community center. A total of 12 sessions of assessment and cognitive intervention were conducted via videoconferencing or by face-to-face method. Assessment included: Cantonese version of Mini Mental State Examination (C-MMSE), Cantonese version of Rivermead Behavioural Memory test (C-RBMT) and Hierarchic Dementia Scale (HDS). Results Twenty-two clients were recruited. There was significant and comparable cognitive improvement in clients in both treatment arms. The videoconference arm was highly accepted by the clients and the community center. Overall compliance rate of participants was above 95%. Conclusions Telemedicine was a feasible, effective and acceptable means in providing cognitive assessment and intervention to older persons with mild cognitive deficits. Promoting such a program to other community settings would further enhance the accessibility of dementia service to the community. Copyright (c) 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available