Computer-aided cognitive training combined with tDCS can improve post-stroke cognitive impairment and cerebral vasomotor function: a randomized controlled trial
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Post-stroke cognitive impairment (PSCI) is the focus and difficulty of poststroke rehabilitation intervention with an incidence of up to 61%, which may be related to the deterioration of cerebrovascular function. Computer-aided cognitive training (CACT) can improve cognitive function through scientific training targeting activated brain regions, becoming a popular training method in recent years. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a non-invasive brain stimulation technique, can regulate the cerebral vascular nerve function, and has an effect on the rehabilitation of cognitive dysfunction after stroke. This study examined the effectiveness of both CACT and tDCS on cognitive and cerebrovascular function after stroke, and explored whether CACT combined with tDCS was more effective. METHODS: A total of 72 patients with PSCI were randomly divided into the conventional cognitive training (CCT) group (n = 18), tDCS group (n = 18), CACT group (n = 18), and CACT combined with tDCS group (n = 18). Patients in each group received corresponding 20-minute treatment 15 times a week for 3 consecutive weeks. Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and the Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Scale (IADL) were used to assess patients' cognitive function and the activities of daily living ability. Transcranial Doppler ultrasound (TCD) was used to assess cerebrovascular function, including cerebral blood flow velocity (CBFV), pulse index (PI), and breath holding index (BHI). These outcome measures were measured before and after treatment. RESULTS: Compared with those at baseline, both the MoCA and IADL scores significantly increased after treatment (P < 0.01) in each group. There was no significantly difference in efficacy among CCT, CACT and tDCS groups. The CACT combined with tDCS group showed greater improvement in MoCA scores compared with the other three groups (P < 0.05), especially in the terms of visuospatial and executive. BHI significantly improved only in CACT combined with tDCS group after treatment (p ≤ 0.05) but not in the other groups. Besides, no significant difference in CBFV or PI was found before and after the treatments in all groups. CONCLUSION: Both CACT and tDCS could be used as an alternative to CCT therapy to improve cognitive function and activities of daily living ability after stroke. CACT combined with tDCS may be more effective improving cognitive function and activities of daily living ability in PSCI patients, especially visuospatial and executive abilities, which may be related to improved cerebral vasomotor function reflected by the BHI. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The study was registered in the Chinese Registry of Clinical Trials (ChiCTR2100054063). Registration date: 12/08/2021.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».