Citations

Background: Research has shown that individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) value quality of life (QoL) above and beyond cognitive function or other potential outcomes in MCI. There is evidence supporting the negative impact of poor physical function on QoL ratings. Objective: The study explored whether a modified measure of self-efficacy for managing MCI and education mediated and/or moderated the relationship between physical function and QoL in persons with MCI. Methods: Baseline data from 200 participants with MCI were obtained from a larger study assessing the effectiveness of a behavioral intervention. Physical function was assessed by the Short Physical Performance Battery. QoL was assessed with the Quality of Life in Alzheimer’s Disease scale. Memory-related self-efficacy was assessed using a modified 9-item version of the Chronic Disease Self-Efficacy Scales. Mediation and moderation analyses tested the hypotheses that self-efficacy and education alter the association between physical function and QoL in individuals with MCI. All analyses were adjusted for age, cognitive severity, and sex. Results: Self-efficacy for managing MCI was a significant mediator of the association between physical function and perceived QoL. Individuals with better physical function reported higher self-efficacy which was associated with higher QoL ratings. Conclusions: Greater self-efficacy for managing MCI mediated the negative association between physical function and quality of life in this exploratory study. Interventions aimed at enhancing memory self-efficacy in MCI may improve perceived QoL, even in the presence of poor physical function. Future research is needed to investigate this further.

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.

ObjectiveThis study aims to provide effect size estimates of the impact of two cognitive rehabilitation interventions provided to patients with mild cognitive impairment: computerized brain fitness exercise and memory support system on support partners' outcomes of depression, anxiety, quality of life, and partner burden.MethodsA randomized controlled pilot trial was performed.ResultsAt 6 months, the partners from both treatment groups showed stable to improved depression and anxiety scores, while partners in an untreated control group showed worsening depression and anxiety over 6 months. There were no statistically significant differences on quality of life or burden outcomes in this small pilot trial; however, effect sizes were moderate, suggesting that the sample sizes in this pilot study were not adequate to detect statistical significance.ConclusionEither form of cognitive rehabilitation may help partners' mood or anxiety, compared with providing no treatment. However, effect size estimates related to other partner outcomes (i.e., burden, quality of life) suggest that follow‐up efficacy trials will need sample sizes of at least 30–100 people per group to accurately determine significance. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.