Chandler, Melanie J

Abstract INTRODUCTION Multicomponent non‐pharmacological interventions, such as the HABIT Healthy Action to Benefit Independence & Thinking® program, have shown promise for improving emotional well‐being, functioning, and self‐efficacy in both people with mild cognitive impairment (pwMCI) and their care partners. However, limited research has examined whether outcomes differ based on type of care partner who co‐enrolls with the pwMCI. METHODS We analyzed data from 875 pwMCI−care partner dyads who completed the HABIT program. Multivariate linear mixed‐effects regression models evaluated changes from baseline in outcomes by care partner type (spouse vs. non‐spouse) at post‐intervention, 6‐months, and 12‐ months. RESULTS At post‐intervention, pwMCI with spousal care partners demonstrated significant improvements across all outcomes from baseline, whereas those with non‐spousal partners improved in five out of seven outcomes. Across subsequent follow‐ups, pwMCI with spousal care partners showed sustained mean reductions in anxiety (post‐intervention: −2.0; 12‐month: −0.9) and increased compliance (post‐intervention: 5.7; 12‐month: 0.9). Everyday functioning in memory (post‐intervention: −0.9; 12‐months: 1.8) and executive functioning (post‐intervention: −0.7; 12‐months: 4.8) improved at post‐intervention but declined thereafter. Spousal care partners reported reduced anxiety (−1.2) and depression (−1.3) at post‐intervention, but by 12‐months they experienced increased burden, anxiety, and depression relative to baseline. Non‐spousal pwMCI–care partner dyads did not show significant change at 6 or 12‐months. DISCUSSION The HABIT intervention may have more favorable outcomes for pwMCI and care partners in spousal compared to non‐spousal dyads. These findings highlight the potential impact of care partner characteristics on both immediate and long‐term response to behavioral interventions for MCI. Highlights At post‐intervention, people with mild cognitive impairment (pwMCI) with spousal care partners showed significant improvements across all outcomes, while those with non‐spousal partners improved in five of seven outcomes. Gains attenuated over time for both spousal and non‐spousal dyads Spousal care partners reported reduced anxiety and depression at post‐intervention, but by 12 months they experienced increased burden, anxiety, and depression relative to baseline. Non‐spousal pwMCI–care partner dyads did not show significant change at 6 or 12 months.

There is currently limited and mixed evidence for the cognitive benefits of Computerized Cognitive Training (CCT) and yoga in persons with Mild Cognitive Impairment (pwMCI). The objective of this study was to investigate the benefit of computerized cognitive training (CCT) vs. physical (yoga) intervention on cognitive abilities. Participants in this study were part of the larger Mayo Clinic’s Healthy Action to Benefit Independence and Thinking (HABIT) program comparative effectiveness trial. The HABIT program is designed for pwMCI and their care partner and consists of five behavioral interventions: CCT, Memory Support System-Calendar (MSS-Calendar), wellness education, support groups, and yoga. The subtractive study design randomly withheld one of the interventions for a total of five study arms. Longitudinal mixed-effects regression models were used to investigate the hypothesis that CCT and yoga has a greater positive impact on psychomotor and basic attention abilities at 12 months post-intervention as compared to the other HABIT interventions. Findings showed CCT had a positive impact compared to yoga on the Cogstate psychomotor/attention composite at 12 months post-intervention (ES = 0.54; unadjusted p value = 0.007, adjusted p value = 0.021). The impact of yoga or combining CCT with yoga did not show statistically significant improvement. Continued CCT practice at home showed further benefit on psychomotor/attention at 12 months post-intervention. There was no significant benefit of CCT or yoga on Cogstate learning/working memory composite.

This pilot study examined the functional impact of computerized versus compensatory calendar training in cognitive rehabilitation participants with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Fifty-seven participants with amnestic MCI completed randomly assigned calendar or computer training. A standard care control group was used for comparison. Measures of adherence, memory-based activities of daily living (mADLs), and self-efficacy were completed. The calendar training group demonstrated significant improvement in mADLs compared to controls, while the computer training group did not. Calendar training may be more effective in improving mADLs than computerized intervention. However, this study highlights how behavioral trials with fewer than 30–50 participants per arm are likely underpowered, resulting in seemingly null findings.