Cognitive Digital Intervention for Older Patients with Parkinson’s Disease during COVID-19: A Mixed-Method Pilot Study
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Design
2.2. The Intervention’s Methodology
2.3. Participants’ Inclusion Criteria
2.4. QUANT Outcome Measures and Statistical Analysis
2.5. QUAL Topics and Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Quantitative Findings
3.2. Qualitative Findings
I liked the ‘training’ because the weekly commitment helped me to make new friends. Without detracting from the validity of the ‘games’ we played on a psychological, knowledge, cultural, and other levels, the act of interacting with other people is the aspect that I liked the most.(P5)
“Carrying out these cognitive activities is very positive. It helps us to control the discomfort associated with ‘Parkinson’s’ problems”.(P3)
“The advantages are time and risk savings. When one is on the street, one is increasingly at risk, and because of the time of maybe one to five minutes that it takes to connect and teach, instead of wasting time on those 45 min of travel”.(P9)
“We were better off when we were physically present. We even had a few more laughs when we were face-to-face. We had fun when the group consisted of ten people and there was harmony among us. There was a lot of laughter, even when we were online, but the group was smaller with only four people. There was a heightened sense of emotion when we were physically present in the group to carry out the activities”.(P6)
“I didn’t know how to connect the first time, but after I persisted, I managed. The others also encountered the same difficulties, and we all tried to be in contact at the same time”.(P6)
Face-to-face: “I want the face-to-face meetings to continue because I had to go out in order to attend the meetings at the daycare center, and this stimulated me: I got dressed, put on make-up, took the car, and left home. That is, being physically present while participating required me to engage in a whole set of activities that stimulated me”.(P6)
Online: “Online is fine for me because we are all afflicted with ailments and, therefore, being able to meet and talk in such a calm manner through these new technological means is a great opportunity”.(P5)
Blended: “It would be nice to interact again while being physically present and safe. However, this type of exercise is also okay. Maybe it can be done in person once and then the other times here, let>’s say to meet in person”.(P2)
Undecided: “There are pros and cons to face-to-face or online training sessions. In presence, the group is closer, but you have to go out and you run more risks. On the other hand, you have more time online, you are calmer at home, but there is separation, there is no physical contact. I don’t know which one to choose from the two”.(P9)
4. Discussion
Limitations
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Pringsheim, T.; Jette, N.; Frolkis, A.; Steeves, T.D. The prevalence of Parkinson’s disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Mov. Disord. 2014, 29, 1583–1590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dorsey, E.R.; Elbaz, A.; Nichols, E.; Abbasi, N.; Abd-Allah, F.; Abdelalim, A.; Adsuar, J.C.; Ansha, M.G.; Brayne, C.; Choi, J.-Y.J.; et al. Global, regional, and national burden of Parkinson’s disease, 1990–2016: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet Neurol. 2018, 17, 939–953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ferreri, F.; Agbokou, C.; Gauthier, S. Recognition and management of neuropsychiatric complications in Parkinson’s disease. Can. Med. Assoc. J. 2006, 175, 1545–1552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Poewe, W. Non-motor symptoms in Parkinson’s disease. Eur. J. Neurol. 2008, 15, 14–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rubin, E.H.; Morris, J.C.; Grant, E.A.; Vendegna, T. Very mild senile dementia of the Alzheimer type: I. Clinical assessment. Arch. Neurol. 1989, 46, 379–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Litvan, I.; Goldman, J.G.; Tröster, A.I.; Schmand, B.A.; Weintraub, D.; Petersen, R.C.; Mollenhauer, B.; Adler, C.H.; Marder, K.; Williams-Gray, C.H.; et al. Diagnostic criteria for mild cognitive impairment in Parkinson’s disease: Movement Disorder Society Task Force guidelines. Mov. Disord. 2012, 27, 349–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Emre, M.; Aarsland, D.; Brown, R.; Burn, D.J.; Duyckaerts, C.; Mizuno, Y.; Broe, G.A.; Cummings, J.; Dickson, D.W.; Gauthier, S.; et al. Clinical diagnostic criteria for dementia associated with Parkinson’s disease. J. Mov. Disord. 2007, 22, 1689–1707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cammisuli, D.M.; Cammisuli, S.M.; Fusi, J.; Franzoni, F.; Pruneti, C. Parkinson’s disease–mild cognitive impairment (PD-MCI): A useful summary of update knowledge. Front. Aging Neurosci. 2019, 11, 303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wojtala, J.; Heber, I.A.; Neuser, P.; Heller, J.; Kalbe, E.; Rehberg, S.P.; Storch, A.; Linse, K.; Schneider, C.; Gräber, S.; et al. Cognitive decline in Parkinson’s disease: The impact of the motor phenotype on cognition. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. 2019, 90, 171–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cerasa, A.; Quattrone, A. The effectiveness of cognitive treatment in patients with Parkinson’s disease: A new phase for the neuropsychological rehabilitation. Park. Relat. Disord. 2015, 21, 165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hindle, J.V.; Watermeyer, T.J.; Roberts, J.; Martyr, A.; Lloyd-Williams, H.; Brand, A.; Gutting, P.; Hoare, Z.; Edwards, R.T.; Clare, L. Cognitive rehabiliation for Parkinson’s disease dementia: A study protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial. Trials 2016, 17, 152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nousia, A.; Martzoukou, M.; Tsouris, Z.; Siokas, V.; Aloizou, A.-M.; Liampas, I.; Nasios, G.; Dardiotis, E. The beneficial effects of computer-based cognitive training in Parkinson’s disease: A systematic review. Arch. Clin. Neuropsychol. 2020, 35, 434–447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van Balkom, T.D.; van den Heuvel, O.A.; Berendse, H.W.; van der Werf, Y.D.; Vriend, C. The effects of cognitive training on brain network activity and connectivity in aging and neurodegenerative diseases: A systematic review. Neuropsychol. Rev. 2020, 30, 267–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Butler, M.; McCreedy, E.; Nelson, V.A.; Desai, P.; Ratner, E.; Fink, H.A.; Hemmy, L.S.; McCarten, J.R.; Barclay, T.R.; Brasure, M.; et al. Does cognitive training prevent cognitive decline? A systematic review. Ann. Intern. Med. 2018, 168, 63–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Capotosto, E.; Belacchi, C.; Gardini, S.; Faggian, S.; Piras, F.; Mantoan, V.; Salvalaio, E.; Pradelli, S.; Borella, E. Cognitive stimulation therapy in the Italian context: Its efficacy in cognitive and non-cognitive measures in older adults with dementia. Int. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry 2017, 32, 331–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spector, A.; Thorgrimsen, L.; Woods, B.O.B.; Royan, L.; Davies, S.; Butterworth, M.; Orrell, M. Efficacy of an evidence-based cognitive stimulation therapy programme for people with dementia: Randomised controlled trial. Br. J. Psychiatry 2003, 183, 248–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leroi, I.; Vatter, S.; Carter, L.-A.; Smith, S.J.; Orgeta, V.; Poliakoff, E.; Silverdale, M.A.; Raw, J.; Ahearn, D.J.; Taylor, C.; et al. Parkinson’s-adapted cognitive stimulation therapy: A pilot randomized controlled clinical trial. Ther. Adv. Neurol. Disord. 2019, 12, 1756286419852217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- McCormick, S.A.; Vatter, S.; Carter, L.-A.; Smith, S.J.; Orgeta, V.; Poliakoff, E.; Silverdale, M.A.; Raw, J.; Ahearn, D.J.; Taylor, C.; et al. Parkinson’s-adapted cognitive stimulation therapy: Feasibility and acceptability in Lewy body spectrum disorders. J. Neurol. 2019, 266, 1756–1770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- World Health Organization. Maintaining Essential Health Services: Operational Guidance for the COVID-19 Context. Available online: WHO-2019-nCoV-essential_health_services-2020.2-eng.pdf (accessed on 19 July 2021).
- Artusi, C.A.; Romagnolo, A.; Imbalzano, G.; Marchet, A.; Zibetti, M.; Rizzone, M.G.; Lopiano, L. COVID-19 in Parkinson’s disease: Report on prevalence and outcome. Park. Relat. Disord. 2020, 80, 7–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schirinzi, T.; Cerroni, R.; Di Lazzaro, G.; Liguori, C.; Scalise, S.; Bovenzi, R.; Conti, M.; Garasto, E.; Mercuri, N.B.; Pierantozzi, M.; et al. Self-reported needs of patients with Parkinson’s disease during COVID-19 emergency in Italy. Neurol. Sci. 2020, 41, 1373–1375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feeney, M.P.; Xu, Y.; Surface, M.; Shah, H.; Vanegas-Arroyave, N.; Chan, A.K.; Delaney, E.; Przedborski, S.; Beck, J.C.; Alcalay, R.N. The impact of COVID-19 and social distancing on people with Parkinson’s disease: A survey study. NPJ Park. Dis. 2021, 7, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van der Heide, A.; Meinders, M.J.; Bloem, B.R.; Helmich, R.C. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on psychological distress, physical activity, and symptom severity in Parkinson’s disease. J. Park. Dis. 2020, 10, 1355–1364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saluja, A.; Parihar, J.; Garg, D.; Dhamija, R.K. The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on disease severity and quality of life in Parkinson’s disease. Ann. Indian Acad. Neurol. 2021, 24, 217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baschi, R.; Luca, A.; Nicoletti, A.; Caccamo, M.; Cicero, C.E.; D’Agate, C.; Di Giorgi, L.; Bianca, G.L.; Castro, T.L.; Zappia, M.; et al. Changes in motor, cognitive, and behavioral symptoms in Parkinson’s disease and mild cognitive impairment during the COVID-19 lockdown. Front. Psychiatry 2020, 11, 590134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Motolese, F.; Magliozzi, A.; Puttini, F.; Rossi, M.; Capone, F.; Karlinski, K.; Stark-Inbar, A.; Yekutieli, Z.; Di Lazzaro, V.; Marano, M. Parkinson’s disease remote patient monitoring during the COVID-19 lockdown. Front. Neurol. 2020, 11, 567413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maresca, G.; Maggio, M.G.; De Luca, R.; Manuli, A.; Tonin, P.; Pignolo, L.; Calabrò, R.S. Tele-neuro-rehabilitation in Italy: State of the art and future perspectives. Front. Neurol. 2020, 11, 563375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mantovani, E.; Zucchella, C.; Bottiroli, S.; Federico, A.; Giugno, R.; Sandrini, G.; Chiamulera, C.; Tamburin, S. Telemedicine and virtual reality for cognitive rehabilitation: A roadmap for the COVID-19 pandemic. Front. Neurol. 2020, 11, 926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Creswell, J.W.; Clark, V.L.P. Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research, 3rd ed.; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Folstein, M.F.; Folstein, S.E.; McHugh, P.R. ‘Mini-mental state’: A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J. Psychiatr. Res. 1975, 12, 189–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pigliautile, M.; Ricci, M.; Mioshi, E.; Ercolani, S.; Mangialasche, F.; Monastero, R.; Croce, M.F.; Federici, S.; Mecocci, P. Validation study of the Italian Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination Revised in a young-old and old-old population. Dement. Geriatr. Cogn. Disord. 2011, 32, 301–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sheikh, J.I.; Yesavage, J.A. Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS): Recent evidence and development of a shorter version. Clin. Gerontol. 1986, 5, 165–173. [Google Scholar]
- Hughes, A.J.; Daniel, S.E.; Kilford, L.; Lees, A.J. Accuracy of clinical diagnosis of idiopathic Parkinson’s disease: A clinico-pathological study of 100 cases. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. 1992, 55, 181–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amodio, P.; Wenin, H.; Del Piccolo, F.; Mapelli, D.; Montagnese, S.; Pellegrini, A.; Musto, C.; Gatta, A.; Umiltà, C. Variability of trail making test, symbol digit test and line trait test in normal people. A normative study taking into account age-dependent decline and so-ciobiological variables. Aging Clin. Exp. Res. 2002, 14, 117–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Caffarra, P.; Vezzadini, G.; Dieci, F.; Zonato, F.; Venneri, A. Una versione abbreviata del test di Stroop: Dati normativi nella popolazione italiana. Riv. Neurol. 2002, 12, 111–115. [Google Scholar]
- Laiacona, M.; Inzaghi, M.G.; De Tanti, A.; Capitani, E. Wisconsin card sorting test: A new global score, with Italian norms, and its relationship with the Weigl sorting test. Neurol. Sci. 2000, 21, 279–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gainotti, G.; Marra, C.; Villa, G. A double dissociation between accuracy and time of execution on attentional tasks in Alzheimer’s disease and multi-infarct dementia. Brain 2001, 124, 731–738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Appollonio, I.; Leone, M.; Isella, V.; Piamarta, F.; Consoli, T.; Villa, M.L.; Forapani, E.; Russo, A.; Nichelli, P. The Frontal Assesment Battery (FAB): Normative values in an Italian population sample. Neurol. Sci. 2005, 26, 108–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Monaco, M.; Costa, A.; Caltagirone, C.; Carlesimo, G.A. Forward and backward span for verbal and visuo-spatial data: Standardization and normative data from an Italian adult population. Neurol. Sci. 2013, 34, 749–754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carlesimo, G.A.; Caltagirone, C.; Gainotti, G. The Mental Deterioration Battery: Normative data, diagnostic reliability and qualitative analyses of cognitive impairment. The Group for the Standardization of the Mental Deterioration Battery. Eur. Neurol. 1996, 36, 378–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Luzzi, S.; Pesallaccia, M.; Fabi, K.; Muti, M.; Viticchi, G.; Provinciali, L.; Piccirilli, M. Non-verbal memory measured by Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure B: Normative data. Neurol. Sci. 2011, 32, 1081–1089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Costa, A.; Bagoj, E.; Monaco, M.; Zabberoni, S.; De Rosa, S.; Papantonio, A.M.; Mundi, C.; Caltagirone, C.; Carlesimo, G.A. Standardization and normative data obtained the Italian population for a new verbal fluency instrument, the phonemic/semantic alternate fluency test. Neurol. Sci. 2014, 35, 365–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Catricalà, E.; Della Rosa, P.A.; Ginex, V.; Mussetti, Z.; Plebani, V.; Cappa, S.F. An Italian battery for the assessment of semantic memory disorders. Neurol. Sci. 2013, 34, 985–993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mathuranath, P.S.; Nestor, P.J.; Berrios, G.E.; Rakowicz, W.; Hodges, J.R. A brief cognitive test battery to differentiate Alzheimer’s disease and frontotemporal dementia. Neurology 2000, 55, 1613–1620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Collins, J.T.; Mohamed, B. Feasibility of remote Memory Clinics using the plan, do, study, act (PDSA) cycle. Age Ageing 2021, 10, 2259–2263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ciemins, E.L.; Barbara Holloway, B.; Coon, P.J.; McClosky-Armstrong, T.; Min, S.J. Telemedicine and the mini-mental state examination: Assessment from a distance. Telemed. e-Health 2009, 15, 476–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bengtsson, M. How to plan and perform a qualitative study using content analysis. Nurs. Open 2016, 2, 8–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lincoln, Y.S.; Guba, E.G. Naturalistic Inquiry; Sage Publications: Newbury Park, CA, USA, 1985. [Google Scholar]
- Golafshani, N. Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. Qual. Rep. 2003, 8, 597–607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shenton, A.K. Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Educ. Inf. 2004, 22, 63–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mayring, P. Qualitative Content Analysis. In A Companion to Qualitative Research; Flick, U., von Kardoff, E., Steinke, I., Eds.; Sage Publications: London, UK, 2004; pp. 159–176. [Google Scholar]
- Carbone, E.; Gardini, S.; Pastore, M.; Piras, F.; Vincenzi, M.; Borella, E. Cognitive stimulation therapy for older adults with mild-to-moderate dementia in Italy: Effects on cognitive functioning, and on emotional and neuropsychiatric symptoms. J. Gerontol. B. Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 2021, 76, 1700–1710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Orrell, M.; Aguirre, E.; Spector, A.; Hoare, Z.; Woods, R.T.; Streater, A.; Donovan, H.; Hoe, J.; Knapp, M.; Whitaker, C.; et al. Maintenance cognitive stimulation therapy for dementia: Single-blind, multicentre, pragmatic randomised controlled trial. Br. J. Psychiatry 2014, 204, 454–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Czaja, S.; Boot, W.; Charness, N.; Rogers, W. Individual Differences. In Designing for Older Adults: Principles and Creative Human Factors Approaches, 3rd ed.; Czaja, S., Boot, W., Charness, N., Rogers, W., Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2019; pp. 33–47. ISBN 9781138053663. [Google Scholar]
- Peretti, A.; Amenta, F.; Tayebati, S.K.; Nittari, G.; Mahdi, S.S. Telerehabilitation: Review of the state-of-the-art and areas of application. JMIR Rehabil. 2017, 4, e7511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Holthe, T.; Halvorsrud, L.; Karterud, D.; Hoel, K.A.; Lund, A. Usability and acceptability of technology for community-dwelling older adults with mild cognitive impairment and dementia: A systematic literature review. Clin. Interv. Aging 2018, 13, 863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Klimova, B.; Poulova, P. Older People and Technology Acceptance. In Human Aspects of IT for the Aged Population. Acceptance, Communication and Participation; Zhou, J., Salvendy, G., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 85–94. [Google Scholar]
- Kaplan, S.; Kaplan, R. Cognition and Environment: Functioning in an Uncertain World; Praeger Publications: Santa Barbara, CA, USA, 1982. [Google Scholar]
- Rogers, W.A.; Mitzner, T.L. Envisioning the future for older adults: Autonomy, health, well-being, and social connectedness with technology support. Futures 2017, 87, 133–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hollander, J.E.; Carr, B.G. Virtually perfect? Telemedicine for COVID-19. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020, 382, 1679–1681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Adams, J.L.; Myers, T.L.; Waddell, E.M.; Spear, K.L.; Schneider, R.B. Telemedicine: A valuable tool in neurodegenerative diseases. Curr. Geriatr. Rep. 2020, 9, 72–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Manenti, R.; Gobbi, E.; Baglio, F.; Macis, A.; Ferrari, C.; Pagnoni, I.; Rossetto, F.; Di Tella, S.; Alemanno, F.; Cimino, V.; et al. Effectiveness of an innovative cognitive treatment and telerehabilitation on subjects with mild cognitive impairment: A multicenter, randomized, active-controlled study. Front. Aging Neurosci. 2020, 12, 400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maggio, M.G.; De Luca, R.; Manuli, A.; Calabrò, R.S. The five ‘W’ of cognitive telerehabilitation in the COVID-19 era. Expert Rev. Med. Devices 2020, 17, 473–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheung, G.; Peri, K. Challenges to dementia care during COVID-19: Innovations in remote delivery of group cognitive stimulation therapy. Aging Ment. Health 2021, 25, 977–979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kraepelien, M.; Schibbye, R.; Månsson, K.; Sundström, C.; Riggare, S.; Andersson, G.; Lindefors, N.; Svenningsson, P.; Kaldo, V. Individually tailored internet-based cognitive-behavioral therapy for daily functioning in patients with Parkinson’s disease: A randomized controlled trial. J. Park. Dis. 2020, 10, 653–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cotelli, M.; Manenti, R.; Brambilla, M.; Gobbi, E.; Ferrari, C.; Binetti, G.; Cappa, S.F. Cognitive telerehabilitation in mild cognitive impairment, Alzheimer’s disease and frontotemporal dementia: A systematic review. J. Telemed. Telecare 2019, 25, 67–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brearly, T.W.; Shura, R.D.; Martindale, S.L.; Lazowski, R.A.; Luxton, D.D.; Shenal, B.V.; Rowland, J.A. Neuropsychological test administration by videoconference: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuropsychol. Rev. 2017, 27, 174–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kwok, T.C.; Chau, W.W.; Yuen, K.S.; Wong, A.Y.; Li, J.C.; Shiu, R.Y.; Ho, F.K. Who would benefit from memory training? A pilot study examining the ceiling effect of concurrent cognitive stimulation. Clin. Interv. Aging 2011, 6, 83. [Google Scholar]
- Standing, C.; Standing, S.; McDermott, M.L.; Gururajan, R.; Kiani Mavi, R. The paradoxes of telehealth: A review of the literature 2000–2015. Syst. Res. Behav. Sci. 2018, 35, 90–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Neuropsychological Dimensions | Assessment Tools |
---|---|
Attention and executive functions | Trail Making Test A, TMT-A, and Trail Making Test, TMT-B (Amodio et al., 2002) [34]. Stroop Test (Caffarra et al., 2002) [35] Weigl’s Sorting Test (Laiacona et al., 2000) [36] Multiple Features Target Test (MFTC) time; accuracy; error (Gainotti et al., 2001) [37] Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB) (Apollonio et al., 2005) [38] |
Memory | Digit span (Monaco et al., 2013) [39] |
Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test-RAVLT, immediate and delayed recall (Carlesimo et al., 1996) [40] | |
Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure B: immediate and delayed recall (Luzzi et al., 2011) [41] | |
Language | Fluency for semantic categories (Costa et al., 2014) [42] |
Phonemic Fluency (FAS) (Costa et al., 2014) [42] | |
Noun Naming (CAGI) (Catricalà et al., 2013) [43] | |
Visual constructional ability | Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure B copy (Luzzi et al., 2011) [41] |
Characteristics | Total |
---|---|
Total number of participants, n (%) | 18 (100%) |
Females, n (%) | 7 (40%) |
Males, n (%) | 11 (60%) |
Mean age, years | 73.1 ± 4.8 |
Educational level | 11.3 ± 4.1 |
MMSE | 27.8 ± 1.7 |
Code | Sub-Codes | Code | Code | Sub-Code 1 | Sub-Code 2 | Code | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ID | Level of appreciation of the online treatment | Reasons | Mood | Experience with the technology | Advantages | Disadvantages Difficulties | Preference for the future |
1 | Very | Stimulating | Calm | Positive | Socialization albeit the pandemic | None | Online |
2 | Very | Stimulating | Calm | Positive | Socialization albeit the pandemic | None | Blended |
3 | Very | Stimulating | Happy | Positive | Socialization albeit the pandemic | None | In-person |
4 | Very much | Stimulating | Stimulated | Positive | Not to get out | Lack of physical interaction | Blended |
5 | Very much | A place for listening and welcoming | Stimulated | Positive | Continue the treatment albeit the pandemic | None | Online |
6 | Very | Stimulating | Amused | Positive | Not to get out | Lack of physical interaction | In-person |
7 | Very much | A place for listening and welcoming | Calm | Positive | Continue the treatment albeit the pandemic | Difficulties with technology | Online |
8 | Very | Stimulating | Stimulated | Positive | Not to get out | Lack of physical interaction | In-person |
9 | Very much | A place for listening and welcoming | Calm | Positive | Not to get out | Not to get out | Undecided |
10 | Very much | Stimulating | Calm | Positive | Socialization albeit the pandemic | Lack of physical interaction | Online |
11 | Very | Socialization | Happy Calm | Positive | Continue the treatment albeit the pandemic | Difficulties with technology | In-person |
12 | Not much | Waste of time: bad connection | Bothered | Positive | Not to get out | Lack of physical interaction | In-person |
13 | Very much | A place for listening and welcoming | Calm | Negative | Not to get out | None | In-person |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Santini, S.; Rampioni, M.; Stara, V.; Di Rosa, M.; Paciaroni, L.; Paolini, S.; Fioretti, S.; Valenza, S.; Riccardi, G.R.; Pelliccioni, G. Cognitive Digital Intervention for Older Patients with Parkinson’s Disease during COVID-19: A Mixed-Method Pilot Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 14844. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192214844
Santini S, Rampioni M, Stara V, Di Rosa M, Paciaroni L, Paolini S, Fioretti S, Valenza S, Riccardi GR, Pelliccioni G. Cognitive Digital Intervention for Older Patients with Parkinson’s Disease during COVID-19: A Mixed-Method Pilot Study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(22):14844. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192214844
Chicago/Turabian StyleSantini, Sara, Margherita Rampioni, Vera Stara, Mirko Di Rosa, Lucia Paciaroni, Susy Paolini, Simona Fioretti, Silvia Valenza, Giovanni Renato Riccardi, and Giuseppe Pelliccioni. 2022. "Cognitive Digital Intervention for Older Patients with Parkinson’s Disease during COVID-19: A Mixed-Method Pilot Study" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 22: 14844. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192214844