4.5 Article

Cognitive stimulation therapy for Alzheimer's disease: the effect of cognitive stimulation therapy on the progression of mild Alzheimer's disease in patients treated with donepezil

期刊

INTERNATIONAL PSYCHOGERIATRICS
卷 19, 期 2, 页码 241-252

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S1041610206004194

关键词

Alzheimer's disease; cognitive rehabilitation; cognitive stimulation therapy; non-pharmacological treatment

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: There is general consensus regarding the benefit of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (e.g. donepezil) in Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, the combined effect of acetylcholinesterase and cognitive stimulation therapy (CST) is still controversial. Objective: This study examines their combined effect on the progression of cognitive decline in AD by comparing the cognitive performance of 17 AD patients treated with CST and donepezil (combined treatment group) and 13 AD patients treated with donepezil alone (control group). Methods: Patients in the combined treatment group received 5 mg of donepezil per day and about 20 one-hour CST sessions for one year, whereas the control group received only 5 mg of donepezil per day. The first eight sessions were carried out once a week, and subsequent sessions were generally once every two weeks. The patients were evaluated for changes in cognitive ability by administering the Mini-mental State Examination (MMSE) before the start of CST (baseline) and about one year later (follow-up). Results: A repeated-measure analysis of variance revealed a significant group x time interaction. The MMSE score decreased significantly in the control group, but did not change significantly in the combined treatment group. Three patients in the control group declined by four points on the MMSE, compared to none in the combined treatment group. Effect size (ES) in the control group was relatively large and negative, while the ES in the combined treatment group was close to zero.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据