NCT01596205

Brief Summary

Previous studies about cognitive intervention targeting older adults revealed that cognitive training had effects on the improvement of cognitive function.However, researches are rare that investigated direct changes of brain structures after cognitive training. The advanced scientific technique allowed us to develop service robots designed to assist human work, which can be important with an increase in the aging population and high costs of elderly care. In this regard, the investigators considered robots for elderly's cognitive training and developed 17 cognitive programs in collaboration with Center for Intelligent Robotics at Korea Institute of Science and Technology. The purposes of this study were to demonstrate the effects of the investigators newly developed robot assisted group cognitive training programs on the brain in older adults and to identify whether they can help to improve cognitive function or mood in the elderly compared to the conventional cognitive training or control group that were not involved in any cognitive training.

Trial Health

87
On Track

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
85

participants targeted

Target at P50-P75 for not_applicable

Timeline
Completed

Started Jun 2011

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
completed

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

Study Start

First participant enrolled

June 1, 2011

Completed
8 months until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

February 1, 2012

Completed
3 months until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

May 1, 2012

Completed
8 days until next milestone

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

May 9, 2012

Completed
1 day until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

May 10, 2012

Completed
Last Updated

May 10, 2012

Status Verified

May 1, 2012

Enrollment Period

8 months

First QC Date

May 9, 2012

Last Update Submit

May 9, 2012

Conditions

Keywords

cognitive therapy

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • the change in cortical thickness between the baseline and the post-intervention assessment.

    The primary outcome of this study was the change in cortical thickness between the baseline and the post-intervention assessment.

    between the baseline and the post-intervention assessment (12 week training)

Study Arms (3)

Robot intervention

EXPERIMENTAL

Participants were given baseline assessments and randomly assigned into 3 groups; 24 with robot assisted cognitive training group (Robot intervention group), 24 with experienced behavioral therapist group (Conventional intervention group), and 37 without cognitive training (Control group).It was explained that there was a waiting list, therefore, participants in control group had an opportunity to participate in cognitive training program after a delay of 12 weeks for the intervention.

Behavioral: Robot assisted cognitive training

Conventional intervention

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

conventional cognitive training group - pen and pencil with experienced behavioral therapists

Behavioral: Conventional cognitive training group

Control group

NO INTERVENTION

Interventions

We developed total 17 software programs for cognitive training with robot which were intended to develop for improvement of following cognitive function;5 programs for memory, 2 for language , 1 for reasoning, 3 for working memory or speed of processing, 2 for calculation and 4 for visuospatial function.

Robot intervention

Experienced behavioral therapists who had been clinical neuropsychologists for 2 years instructed the participants in cognitive training. Thearpists were familiarized with manuals for cognitive training before study inception, and were instructed to adhere to the manual but were allowed to distribute time flexibly among the programs in the same cognitive domain. In all sessions of conventional intervention group, the behavioral therapists showed several questions or instructions on the screen and then the participants answered to the questions with verbal or written words using paper and pencil.

Conventional intervention

Eligibility Criteria

Age60 Years+
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersYes
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

  • community-dwelling volunteers aged 60 years or older
  • without dementia
  • MMSE=26 or above

You may not qualify if:

  • if they had known dementia or significant cognitive impairment accompanied by dysfunction of daily living activities;
  • had 6 years of education or under;
  • were illiterate
  • were unavailable during the testing and intervention periods of the study;
  • had severe losses in vision or hearing; had major neurological or psychiatric illness history including any history of stroke, transient ischemic attack or traumatic brain injury;
  • had a medication history which might affect on cognitive function such as acetylcholinesterase inhibitor or memantine
  • had medical problems such as thyroid, liver and renal disease;
  • had a significan structural abnormalities on their baseline brain MRI.

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

Samsung Medical Center

Seoul, 135-710, South Korea

Location

Related Publications (1)

  • Kim GH, Jeon S, Im K, Kwon H, Lee BH, Kim GY, Jeong H, Han NE, Seo SW, Cho H, Noh Y, Park SE, Kim H, Hwang JW, Yoon CW, Kim HJ, Ye BS, Chin JH, Kim JH, Suh MK, Lee JM, Kim ST, Choi MT, Kim MS, Heilman KM, Jeong JH, Na DL. Structural brain changes after traditional and robot-assisted multi-domain cognitive training in community-dwelling healthy elderly. PLoS One. 2015 Apr 21;10(4):e0123251. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0123251. eCollection 2015.

Study Officials

  • Duk L. Na, MD,PhD

    Samsung Medical Center

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
not applicable
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
SINGLE
Who Masked
OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
Purpose
PREVENTION
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
SPONSOR

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

May 9, 2012

First Posted

May 10, 2012

Study Start

June 1, 2011

Primary Completion

February 1, 2012

Study Completion

May 1, 2012

Last Updated

May 10, 2012

Record last verified: 2012-05

Locations