StrokeNCT02220816
Efficacy of an Attentional Process Training Using Competitive Versus Non Competitive Strategies
A study testing Competitive training and Non-Competitive Training in people with Stroke and Brain Injuries, run by Hospitales Nisa at 1 site in Spain.
Trial summary
Within a prospective, randomised, controlled study 60, selected patients with chronic (> 6 months) stroke or traumatic brain injury will be randomised to 30 1-hour sessions of competitive versus non-competitive attentional training. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 75 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Stroke, Brain Injuries
- What is being tested?
- Competitive training and Non-Competitive Training
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 60 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSpain
- Study dates
- Oct 2014to Mar 2015
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 75 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Acquired brain injury patients (stroke and traumatic brain injury)
- Chronicity > 6 months
- More than 3 months under cognitive rehabilitation
- Mississippi Aphasia Screening Test (comprehension subtest > 45)
Who cannot join
- Severe cognitive impairment defined as < 23 on Mini Mental Status Examination
- Unable to give informed consent
- Visual or auditive disorders limiting the ability to comply with treatment regimen
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Within a prospective, randomised, controlled study 60, selected patients with chronic (> 6 months) stroke or traumatic brain injury will be randomised to 30 1-hour sessions of competitive versus non-competitive attentional training. Competitive training will include fifteen 1-hour sessions of standard (paper and pencil) training under competitive situations and fifteen 1-hour sessions of competitive attentional games designed for this purpose using a new virtual reality system (conventional liquid-crystal-display screen with an infrared LED array to facilitate multi-touch experience embedded in a conventional table). Progress will be evaluated by pre and post measurement of attentional neuropsychological tests, subjective reports of global attention, usability and motivational scales. Our hypothesis is that competitive training is more effective in improving attention than conventional training in the chronic phase after acquired brain injury.
Read the detailed description
Participants: Sixty 18-75 years-old patients with acquired brain injury, will be randomly assigned to 30 sessions of competitive versus non-competitive cognitive attentional training (see inclusion-exclusion criteria). Material and Methods: Randomized clinical trial comparing two different attentional training strategies. Attentional measures, usability data and caregiver/family perception of change, will be compared after completing both conditions. Competitive training will include a new computer based training program that involve using attentional skills under different competitive scenarios. Attentional exercises were designed according to the instructions of two experts neuropsychologists and included game-based situations simulating different olympic disciplines.Neuropsychological protocol: An assessment before the beginning of the intervention and pos-treatment will be done by a trained blinded neuropsychologist using measures of selective, sustained, divided and alternating attention (see primary outcome measures). Usability and Motivation: It is well-known that game-based cognitive exercises can increase motivation to treatment which in turn can increase learning strategies and improve outcomes after rehabilitation processes. Competitive tasks can also improve the effort and interest of the players and the intensity of the task through increasing motivation to win, get a reward and beat the others. Since motivation was an important element of our research, we assessed this capacity at the end of the treatment with the Intrinsic Motivation Scale. Also, the revised Competitiveness Index was used to measure the subject's preference for competitive situations. Finally, usability was considered a secondary outcome of our study since most of the games employed here were designed to be played in a new virtual reality system which was build to facilitate competitive strategies among 2-4 players (see secondary outcomes). Sample Size Calculation: There was any previous study that used the design proposed in this investigation. Considering a reduction bigger of 20% on the Hit-Reaction Time of the CPT-II scores in the active group intervention, sample size in both groups of 27 participants and standard-deviation in the magnitude of half of the medium score in each group (moderate variability), the study will be able to detect a moderate effect size (ES = 0,4). Calculating a sample loss of 10% each group, we define a sample size per group of 30 individuals. Statistical methods Statistical analyses will be performed with Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) 12.0. The univariate analyses will be performed with the t student test / Mann-Whitney to continuous variables or Chi-Square test (X²) / Fischer test to categorical variables. The effective of the intervention over time will be assess through analyses of mixed models (repeated measures ANOVA).
- Conditions
- Stroke, Brain Injuries
- Being tested
- Competitive training, Non-Competitive Training
- Keywords
- Attention, Competitive, Training
- Medical subject headings
- Stroke, Brain Injuries
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Competitive trainingBehavioural
30 sessions of competitive cognitive training; 3 - 5 sessions/week; duration 45 min
Non-Competitive TrainingBehavioural
30 sessions of non-competitive cognitive training; 3 - 5 sessions/week; duration 45 min
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Competitive Training | Experimental | The patients will receive only competitive activities designed to restore attention abilities. These include pencil-and-paper tasks completed under competitive circumstances and competitive virtual games specifically designed to treat different aspects of attention (divided, selective, sustained, etc). Receives: Behavioral: Competitive training |
| Non-Competitive Training | Active comparator | The patients will receive conventional attentional training. Pencil and paper tasks focused on different aspects of attention (divided, selective, sustained, etc.) will be completed by all participant under individual or group-therapy sessions. No competitive training will be allowed. Receives: Behavioral: Non-Competitive Training |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in attentional psychometric measures
Neuropsychological battery: Conner's Continuous Performance Test (CPT-II), Color-Trail Test, d2, Stroop test, Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-IV digit-span, Corsi block-tapping test
Measured: Baseline versus end of treatment (an expected average of 8 weeks)
Secondary outcomes (1)
Usability measures
System Usability Scale, Intrinsic Motivation Inventory
Measured: Baseline versus end of treatment (an expected average of 8 weeks)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted20 Aug 2014 (estimated)
- Study startOct 2014
- Primary completionMar 2015
- Study completionMar 2015
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for StrokeStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Investigator
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Hospitales Nisa
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Universitat Politècnica de València, University of Seville
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Roberto Llorens, PhD, Principal investigator, Universitat Politècnica de València
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02220816
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- NISA-COG-2014/1
- Status last verified
- Aug 2015
- First submitted
- 18 Aug 2014
- Last updated
- 19 Aug 2015
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 19 Aug 2015. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Efficacy of an Attentional Process Training Using Competitive Versus Non Competitive Strategies
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02220816
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- NISA-COG-2014/1
- Conditions
- Stroke, Brain Injuries
- Keywords
- Attention, Competitive, Training
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Hospitales NisaUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Universitat Politècnica de València, University of Seville
- Study start
- Oct 2014
- Primary completion
- Mar 2015 (actual)
- Study completion
- Mar 2015 (actual)
- First posted
- 20 Aug 2014 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Within a prospective, randomised, controlled study 60, selected patients with chronic (> 6 months) stroke or traumatic brain injury will be randomised to 30 1-hour sessions of competitive versus non-competitive attentional training. Competitive training will include fifteen 1-hour sessions of standard (paper and pencil) training under competitive situations and fifteen 1-hour sessions of competitive attentional games designed for this purpose using a new virtual reality system (conventional liquid-crystal-display screen with an infrared LED array to facilitate multi-touch experience embedded in a conventional table). Progress will be evaluated by pre and post measurement of attentional neuropsychological tests, subjective reports of global attention, usability and motivational scales. Our hypothesis is that competitive training is more effective in improving attention than conventional training in the chronic phase after acquired brain injury.
Detailed description
Participants: Sixty 18-75 years-old patients with acquired brain injury, will be randomly assigned to 30 sessions of competitive versus non-competitive cognitive attentional training (see inclusion-exclusion criteria). Material and Methods: Randomized clinical trial comparing two different attentional training strategies. Attentional measures, usability data and caregiver/family perception of change, will be compared after completing both conditions. Competitive training will include a new computer based training program that involve using attentional skills under different competitive scenarios. Attentional exercises were designed according to the instructions of two experts neuropsychologists and included game-based situations simulating different olympic disciplines.Neuropsychological protocol: An assessment before the beginning of the intervention and pos-treatment will be done by a trained blinded neuropsychologist using measures of selective, sustained, divided and alternating attention (see primary outcome measures). Usability and Motivation: It is well-known that game-based cognitive exercises can increase motivation to treatment which in turn can increase learning strategies and improve outcomes after rehabilitation processes. Competitive tasks can also improve the effort and interest of the players and the intensity of the task through increasing motivation to win, get a reward and beat the others. Since motivation was an important element of our research, we assessed this capacity at the end of the treatment with the Intrinsic Motivation Scale. Also, the revised Competitiveness Index was used to measure the subject's preference for competitive situations. Finally, usability was considered a secondary outcome of our study since most of the games employed here were designed to be played in a new virtual reality system which was build to facilitate competitive strategies among 2-4 players (see secondary outcomes). Sample Size Calculation: There was any previous study that used the design proposed in this investigation. Considering a reduction bigger of 20% on the Hit-Reaction Time of the CPT-II scores in the active group intervention, sample size in both groups of 27 participants and standard-deviation in the magnitude of half of the medium score in each group (moderate variability), the study will be able to detect a moderate effect size (ES = 0,4). Calculating a sample loss of 10% each group, we define a sample size per group of 30 individuals. Statistical methods Statistical analyses will be performed with Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) 12.0. The univariate analyses will be performed with the t student test / Mann-Whitney to continuous variables or Chi-Square test (X²) / Fischer test to categorical variables. The effective of the intervention over time will be assess through analyses of mixed models (repeated measures ANOVA).
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (investigator)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Competitive Training | Experimental | Behavioral: Competitive trainingThe patients will receive only competitive activities designed to restore attention abilities. These include pencil-and-paper tasks completed under competitive circumstances and competitive virtual games specifically designed to treat different aspects of attention (divided, selective, sustained, etc). |
| Non-Competitive Training | Active comparator | Behavioral: Non-Competitive TrainingThe patients will receive conventional attentional training. Pencil and paper tasks focused on different aspects of attention (divided, selective, sustained, etc.) will be completed by all participant under individual or group-therapy sessions. No competitive training will be allowed. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 75 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Acquired brain injury patients (stroke and traumatic brain injury)
- Chronicity > 6 months
- More than 3 months under cognitive rehabilitation
- Mississippi Aphasia Screening Test (comprehension subtest > 45)
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Severe cognitive impairment defined as < 23 on Mini Mental Status Examination
- Unable to give informed consent
- Visual or auditive disorders limiting the ability to comply with treatment regimen
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Competitive training30 sessions of competitive cognitive training; 3 - 5 sessions/week; duration 45 min | Behavioural | Competitive Training |
| Non-Competitive Training30 sessions of non-competitive cognitive training; 3 - 5 sessions/week; duration 45 min | Behavioural | Non-Competitive Training |
Primary outcome
Change in attentional psychometric measures
Time frame: Baseline versus end of treatment (an expected average of 8 weeks)
Neuropsychological battery: Conner's Continuous Performance Test (CPT-II), Color-Trail Test, d2, Stroop test, Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-IV digit-span, Corsi block-tapping test
1 secondary outcome
Usability measures
Time frame: Baseline versus end of treatment (an expected average of 8 weeks)
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 19 Aug 2015.
Related trials for Stroke
Recruiting
Connectomic Alterations Following Acute Ischemic Stroke in the MCA Territory
Ischemic Stroke
RecruitingObservational study
Clevidipine for the Antihypertensive Treatment of Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage
Intracerebral Hemorrhage, Stroke
Active, not recruitingPhase 4
A Study Testing How Well the Drug Extract of Ginkgo Biloba Leaves Tablets Works for People With Memory or Thinking Problems After a Stroke When Added to Standard Treatment
Ischemic Stroke Hospitalized, Impairment, Cognitive
Not yet recruitingPhase 4
Anti-inflammatory and Anti-thrombotic Therapy With colcHicine and Low Dose Rivaroxaban for Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events Reduction in Ischemic Stroke
Ischemic Stroke
RecruitingObservational study
CoMind Early Feasibility Study
Intracranial Pressure, Intracranial Pressure Changes
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Roberto Llorens, PhD principal investigator
Universitat Politècnica de València
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Competitive training and Non-Competitive Training in people with Stroke and Brain Injuries, run by Hospitales Nisa at 1 site in Spain.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 19 Aug 2015. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Spain. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change in attentional psychometric measures (time frame: Baseline versus end of treatment (an expected average of 8 weeks)). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 19 Aug 2015.