4.5 Article

A randomized, controlled, clinical trial of activity therapy for apathy in patients with dementia residing in long-term care

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GERIATRIC PSYCHIATRY
卷 19, 期 11, 页码 1087-1094

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/gps.1215

关键词

apathy; Alzheimer's disease; quality of life; reminiscence therapy; dementia; nursing home; long term care

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Apathy is a common symptom inpatients with dementia and has adverse consequences for patients and care-givers. Most treatments for apathy, particularly non-pharmacologic interventions, have not been evaluated in controlled trials. Objectives This study evaluated the efficacy of a kit-based activity intervention, compared to a time and attention control (one-on-one meetings with an activity therapist) in reducing apathy and improving quality of life in 37 patients with dementia. Methods The design was a randomized, controlled, partially masked clinical trial. All outcome measures were administered at baseline and follow-up. The primary outcome measure was the apathy score of the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI). Other outcome measures were the NPI total score, the Alzheimer Disease Related Quality of Life scale(ADQRL), and the Copper Ridge Activity Index (CRAI). Results There was a significant reduction in NPI apathy scores in both treatment groups. The only significant difference between the two treatment groups was a modest advantage for the control intervention on the CRAI cueing subscale (p = 0.027), but not on the other CRAI subscales. There was also a greater within group improvement in quality of life ratings in the control intervention (p = 0.03). Conclusions Despite the substantial improvement in apathy scores during the course of the study, there was no clear advantage to the reminiscence-based intervention over the time and attention, one-on-one control intervention. More research is needed to develop specific behavioral interventions for apathy in patients with dementia. Copyright (C) 2004 John Wiley Sons, Ltd.

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