Evidence Hub

A-118 Efficacy of Computerized Cognitive Rehabilitation Programs in Treating Warfighters with a History of Mild Traumatic Brain Injury

J. Bailie, Alia Westphal, Angela Basham, Juan López, Melissa Caswell, Ida Babakhanyan

Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 2021

Abstract

Computerized cognitive rehabilitation programs (CCRP) have gained popularity in recent years. The objective of this study was to investigate the efficacy of CCRP in military personnel with a prior mTBI.

21 active-duty service members with a history of mTBI were enrolled in the randomized clinical trial. Participants completed one of two CCRPs (Lumosity or the University of California Riverside Brain Game Center). Primary dependent variable was the Key Behavioral Change Inventory (KBCI) with eight scales: Inattention, Impulsivity, Unawareness of problems, Apathy, Interpersonal difficulty, Communication problems, Somatic difficulties, and Emotional adjustment. Other variables included age, education, number of mTBIs, years since last mTBI, total lifetime years of repetitive head injury (RHI).

There was a significant reduction in Somatic Difficulties post-treatment (p = 0.029) with trends towards reductions on Inattention (p = 0.077) and Apathy (p = 0.064). 19/21 (90%) of participants had improvement in at least one KBCI scale (i.e., at least one point change), 14/21 (66%) had 3 or more scales improved, and 7/21 (67%) had 5 or more scales improved. Total number of scales improved was correlated with years since TBI (rho = 0.38, p = 0.044) and years of RHI (rho = 0.459, p = 0.018).

CCRP had modest efficacy in improving persistent symptoms following a mTBI. Fewer years since mTBI and fewer number of years of RHI were associated with better treatment response.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free