Implementation of Cognitive (Neuropsychological) Interventions for Older Adults in Clinical or Community Settings: A Scoping Review.

IF 5.4 2区 心理学 Q1 NEUROSCIENCES Neuropsychology Review Pub Date : 2024-11-06 DOI:10.1007/s11065-024-09650-6
Kerryn E Pike, Lily Li, Sharon L Naismith, Alex Bahar-Fuchs, Alessandra Lee, Inga Mehrani, Adam Bentvelzen, Nicola T Lautenschlager, Megan E O'Connell, Irene Blackberry, Loren Mowszowski
{"title":"Implementation of Cognitive (Neuropsychological) Interventions for Older Adults in Clinical or Community Settings: A Scoping Review.","authors":"Kerryn E Pike, Lily Li, Sharon L Naismith, Alex Bahar-Fuchs, Alessandra Lee, Inga Mehrani, Adam Bentvelzen, Nicola T Lautenschlager, Megan E O'Connell, Irene Blackberry, Loren Mowszowski","doi":"10.1007/s11065-024-09650-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Despite compelling evidence that cognitive interventions for older adults improve cognition, mood, and everyday function, few are implemented in clinical or community practice. This scoping review aims to understand the implementation frameworks and methods used and their contribution to implementation success of cognitive interventions for older adults. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR), and searched CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PSYCINFO databases, using terms related to cognitive interventions, implementation, and older adults. This resulted in 5002 studies, of which 29 were included following an iterative process. Most studies reported on implementation of cognitive stimulation for people with dementia. Only four studies used formal implementation frameworks, with three using RE-AIM, and one a process evaluation using complexity theory. The most frequently addressed implementation concepts were Acceptability, Feasibility, and Effectiveness, while Cost, Cost-Effectiveness, and Maintenance were rarely reported. Solutions to common barriers included the importance of good stakeholder relationships and engagement, a manualised intervention flexible enough to adapt to the context, and ensuring facilitators were well-trained, confident, and enthusiastic.</p>","PeriodicalId":49754,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuropsychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-024-09650-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Despite compelling evidence that cognitive interventions for older adults improve cognition, mood, and everyday function, few are implemented in clinical or community practice. This scoping review aims to understand the implementation frameworks and methods used and their contribution to implementation success of cognitive interventions for older adults. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR), and searched CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PSYCINFO databases, using terms related to cognitive interventions, implementation, and older adults. This resulted in 5002 studies, of which 29 were included following an iterative process. Most studies reported on implementation of cognitive stimulation for people with dementia. Only four studies used formal implementation frameworks, with three using RE-AIM, and one a process evaluation using complexity theory. The most frequently addressed implementation concepts were Acceptability, Feasibility, and Effectiveness, while Cost, Cost-Effectiveness, and Maintenance were rarely reported. Solutions to common barriers included the importance of good stakeholder relationships and engagement, a manualised intervention flexible enough to adapt to the context, and ensuring facilitators were well-trained, confident, and enthusiastic.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在临床或社区环境中对老年人实施认知(神经心理学)干预:范围审查。
尽管有令人信服的证据表明,针对老年人的认知干预措施可以改善认知、情绪和日常功能,但在临床或社区实践中实施的干预措施却寥寥无几。本范围综述旨在了解针对老年人的认知干预措施所使用的实施框架和方法及其对实施成功的贡献。我们遵循《系统综述和荟萃分析首选报告项目》(Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis extension for Scoping Reviews,PRISMA-ScR),并使用与认知干预、实施和老年人相关的术语检索了 CINAHL、EMBASE、MEDLINE 和 PSYCINFO 数据库。结果共检索到 5002 项研究,经过反复筛选,最终纳入了 29 项研究。大多数研究报告了对痴呆症患者实施认知刺激的情况。只有四项研究使用了正式的实施框架,其中三项使用了 RE-AIM,一项使用了复杂性理论进行过程评估。最常涉及的实施概念是可接受性、可行性和有效性,而成本、成本效益和维护则很少报道。常见障碍的解决方案包括:与利益相关者保持良好的关系和参与的重要性;手册化的干预措施要足够灵活,以适应具体情况;确保促进者训练有素、充满信心和热情。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Neuropsychology Review
Neuropsychology Review 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
1.70%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: Neuropsychology Review is a quarterly, refereed publication devoted to integrative review papers on substantive content areas in neuropsychology, with particular focus on populations with endogenous or acquired conditions affecting brain and function and on translational research providing a mechanistic understanding of clinical problems. Publication of new data is not the purview of the journal. Articles are written by international specialists in the field, discussing such complex issues as distinctive functional features of central nervous system disease and injury; challenges in early diagnosis; the impact of genes and environment on function; risk factors for functional impairment; treatment efficacy of neuropsychological rehabilitation; the role of neuroimaging, neuroelectrophysiology, and other neurometric modalities in explicating function; clinical trial design; neuropsychological function and its substrates characteristic of normal development and aging; and neuropsychological dysfunction and its substrates in neurological, psychiatric, and medical conditions. The journal''s broad perspective is supported by an outstanding, multidisciplinary editorial review board guided by the aim to provide students and professionals, clinicians and researchers with scholarly articles that critically and objectively summarize and synthesize the strengths and weaknesses in the literature and propose novel hypotheses, methods of analysis, and links to other fields.
期刊最新文献
Cognitive Intra-individual Variability in Cognitively Healthy APOE ε4 Carriers, Mild Cognitive Impairment, and Alzheimer's Disease: a Meta-analysis. Measurement Error and Methodologic Issues in Analyses of the Proportion of Variance Explained in Cognition. Implementation of Cognitive (Neuropsychological) Interventions for Older Adults in Clinical or Community Settings: A Scoping Review. Verbal and Spatial Working Memory Capacity in Blind Adults and the Possible Influence of Age at Blindness Onset: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Reliability of Theory of Mind Tasks in Schizophrenia, ASD, and Nonclinical Populations: A Systematic Review and Reliability Generalization Meta-analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1