Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT02220816

Efficacy of an Attentional Process Training Using Competitive Versus Non Competitive Strategies

Within a prospective, randomised, controlled study 60, selected patients with chronic (> 6 months) stroke or traumatic brain injury will be randomised to 30 1-hour sessions of competitive versus non-competitive attentional training. Competitive training will include fifteen 1-hour sessions of standard (paper and pencil) training under competitive situations and fifteen 1-hour sessions of competitive attentional games designed for this purpose using a new virtual reality system (conventional liquid-crystal-display screen with an infrared LED array to facilitate multi-touch experience embedded in a conventional table). Progress will be evaluated by pre and post measurement of attentional neuropsychological tests, subjective reports of global attention, usability and motivational scales. Our hypothesis is that competitive training is more effective in improving attention than conventional training in the chronic phase after acquired brain injury.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

18 year–75 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Hospitales NISA

Valencia, 46011, Spain

About this study

Participants: Sixty 18-75 years-old patients with acquired brain injury, will be randomly assigned to 30 sessions of competitive versus non-competitive cognitive attentional training (see inclusion-exclusion criteria). Material and Methods: Randomized clinical trial comparing two different attentional training strategies. Attentional measures, usability data and caregiver/family perception of change, will be compared after completing both conditions. Competitive training will include a new computer based training program that involve using attentional skills under different competitive scenarios. Attentional exercises were designed according to the instructions of two experts neuropsychologists and included game-based situations simulating different olympic disciplines.Neuropsychological protocol: An assessment before the beginning of the intervention and pos-treatment will be done by a trained blinded neuropsychologist using measures of selective, sustained, divided and alternating attention (see primary outcome measures). Usability and Motivation: It is well-known that game-based cognitive exercises can increase motivation to treatment which in turn can increase learning strategies and improve outcomes after rehabilitation processes. Competitive tasks can also improve the effort and interest of the players and the intensity of the task through increasing motivation to win, get a reward and beat the others. Since motivation was an important element of our research, we assessed this capacity at the end of the treatment with the Intrinsic Motivation Scale. Also, the revised Competitiveness Index was used to measure the subject's preference for competitive situations. Finally, usability was considered a secondary outcome of our study since most of the games employed here were designed to be played in a new virtual reality system which was build to facilitate competitive strategies among 2-4 players (see secondary outcomes). Sample Size Calculation: There was any previous study that used the design proposed in this investigation. Considering a reduction bigger of 20% on the Hit-Reaction Time of the CPT-II scores in the active group intervention, sample size in both groups of 27 participants and standard-deviation in the magnitude of half of the medium score in each group (moderate variability), the study will be able to detect a moderate effect size (ES = 0,4). Calculating a sample loss of 10% each group, we define a sample size per group of 30 individuals. Statistical methods Statistical analyses will be performed with Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) 12.0. The univariate analyses will be performed with the t student test / Mann-Whitney to continuous variables or Chi-Square test (X²) / Fischer test to categorical variables. The effective of the intervention over time will be assess through analyses of mixed models (repeated measures ANOVA).

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Acquired brain injury patients (stroke and traumatic brain injury)
  • Chronicity > 6 months
  • More than 3 months under cognitive rehabilitation
  • Mississippi Aphasia Screening Test (comprehension subtest > 45)

Exclusion criteria

  • Severe cognitive impairment defined as < 23 on Mini Mental Status Examination
  • Unable to give informed consent
  • Visual or auditive disorders limiting the ability to comply with treatment regimen

Treatment and study plan

Competitive training

Behavioral

30 sessions of competitive cognitive training; 3 - 5 sessions/week; duration 45 min

Non-Competitive Training

Behavioral

30 sessions of non-competitive cognitive training; 3 - 5 sessions/week; duration 45 min

Primary outcomes

  1. Change in attentional psychometric measures

    Time frame: Baseline versus end of treatment (an expected average of 8 weeks)

    Neuropsychological battery: Conner's Continuous Performance Test (CPT-II), Color-Trail Test, d2, Stroop test, Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-IV digit-span, Corsi block-tapping test

Secondary outcomes

  1. Usability measures

    Time frame: Baseline versus end of treatment (an expected average of 8 weeks)

    System Usability Scale, Intrinsic Motivation Inventory

Other outcomes

  1. Family-centered outcomes

    Time frame: Baseline versus end of treatment (an expected average of 8 weeks)

    Moos Attention Rating Scale, Subjective perception of improvement

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Hospitales Nisa

Other

Collaborators

  • Universitat Politècnica de València
  • University of Seville

Registry information

Important dates

Study start
2014
Primary completion
2015
Study completion
2015
First posted
Aug 20, 2014
Registry last updated
Aug 19, 2015

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.