4.4 Review

Does cognitive remediation for schizophrenia improve functional outcomes?

Journal

CURRENT OPINION IN PSYCHIATRY
Volume 26, Issue 2, Pages 151-157

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/YCO.0b013e32835dcbd4

Keywords

cognitive remediation; neurocognition; psychosocial outcome; schizophrenia; social cognition

Categories

Funding

  1. Dainippon Sumitomo Pharma, Inc.

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose of review Cognitive deficits are recognized as key determinants of functional outcome in schizophrenia. Cognitive remediation for schizophrenia, which is intended to improve both cognition and functional outcome, has been shown to impact cognition regardless of quality of trial methodology used. However, the impact of cognitive remediation on functional outcomes is more variable. A number of recently published articles specifically address the issues impacting the effectiveness of cognitive remediation at improving psychosocial outcomes. Recent findings In this review, studies published since 2011 have been summarized, with a particular focus on psychosocial outcomes. Cognitive remediation may include a focus on neurocognition and/or social cognition, but is increasingly integrative, targeting a range of cognitive skills. Psychosocial outcomes include quality of life, employment outcomes, academic functioning, and social functioning. Summary The reviewed literature indicates that cognitive remediation is most likely to impact functional outcome when individuals are given opportunities to practice the cognitive skills in real-world settings. By integrating a cognitive remediation program with psychosocial rehabilitation programs, functional outcomes are enhanced. Cognitive remediation programs that do not solely rely on drill and practice, but instead incorporate strategy teaching and methods to address beliefs and motivation, are associated with better psychosocial outcomes.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available