Alcohol Dependence, Drug Dependence
Conditions
Keywords
addiction, exercise, cognitive function, mood, self efficacy
Brief summary
Addiction to illicit and prescribed drugs, alcohol and tobacco is associated with a panoply of brain changes that contribute to structural and micro-structural deficits, altered metabolism and neurotransmission, and related cognitive deficits affecting executive function, decision-making, reward salience and motivation. Many of these deficits may act as barriers to recovery, compromising the same spectrum of cognitive processes that established interventions (motivational enhancement, cognitive behavioral therapy, therapeutic communities, etc.) depend on for successful outcomes. Even where there are medications that target a specific addiction (e.g., methadone for opiates), meaningful, sustained recovery relies on the acquisition of adaptive skills and strategies. As such, there is a need to develop interventions for substance use disorders that have the potential to improve health and cognitive and psychosocial functioning, and to be embraced by the treatment community. A growing body of basic and clinical research suggests that physical exercise may reduce drug use and improve cognitive-executive function, mood, and motivation. There is also a growing literature on the effectiveness of positive affirmation as a cognitive-behavioral intervention for depression and PTSD both of which frequently co-occur with addiction. Building on this, we hypothesize that a combined exercise and affirmation intervention (IntenSati) will lead to improved cognitive and psychosocial function. To test this, we propose to conduct a two-arm randomized clinical trial - in adult volunteers with a history of longstanding substance use and who are in treatment in a residential therapeutic community setting (Odyssey House) - to examine cognitive and psychosocial function before, during, and after randomization to either a twelve-week IntenSati intervention condition or to a twelve-week no-exercise/no-affirmations control condition. This is a pilot study intended to collect data on feasibility and effect size. The population and sample size were selected on the basis of likelihood to benefit from the intervention, likelihood for good adherence, and the realities of completing a low-cost pilot study within a one-year timeframe. Overall there were no substantial differences between IntenSati and TAU on measures of cognition, mood, and psychosocial functioning. Limitations include the small sample size, limited exercise intensity and capacity, missed exercise classes, dropout because of placement, work schedules and non-study-related medical conditions.
Detailed description
Addiction to illicit and prescribed drugs, alcohol and tobacco is associated with a panoply of brain changes that contribute to structural and micro-structural deficits, altered metabolism and neurotransmission, and related cognitive deficits affecting executive function, decision-making, reward salience and motivation. Many of these deficits may act as barriers to recovery, compromising the same spectrum of cognitive processes that established interventions (motivational enhancement, cognitive behavioral therapy, therapeutic communities, etc.) depend on for successful outcomes. Even where there are medications that target a specific addiction (e.g., methadone for opiates), meaningful, sustained recovery relies on the acquisition of adaptive skills and strategies. As such, there is a need to develop interventions for substance use disorders that have the potential to improve health and cognitive and psychosocial functioning, and to be embraced by the treatment community. A growing body of basic and clinical research suggests that physical exercise may reduce drug use and improve cognitive-executive function, mood, and motivation. There is also a growing literature on the effectiveness of positive affirmation as a cognitive-behavioral intervention for depression and PTSD both of which frequently co-occur with addiction. Building on this, we hypothesize that a combined exercise and affirmation intervention (IntenSati) will lead to improved cognitive and psychosocial function. To test this, we propose to conduct a two-arm randomized clinical trial - in adult volunteers with a history of longstanding substance use and who are in treatment in a residential therapeutic community setting (Odyssey House) - to examine cognitive and psychosocial function before, during, and after randomization to either a twelve-week IntenSati intervention condition or to a twelve-week no-exercise/no-affirmations control condition. This is a pilot study intended to collect data on feasibility and effect size. The population and sample size were selected on the basis of likelihood to benefit from the intervention, likelihood for good adherence, and the realities of completing a low-cost pilot study within a one-year timeframe. Overall there were no substantial differences between IntenSati and TAU on measures of cognition, mood, and psychosocial functioning. Limitations include the small sample size, limited exercise intensity and capacity, missed exercise classes, dropout because of placement, work schedules and non-study-related medical conditions.
Interventions
IntenSati (a blending of the words intention and sati, the Pali term for mindfulness) combines simple yet vigorous physical movements taken from yoga, martial arts, kickboxing and dance with spoken positive affirmation (e.g. I believe I will succeed, I am strong and I am confident) that are recited simultaneously with the execution of the movements. Indeed, one of the most common reports of IntenSati practitioners is the power of the spoken affirmations to stick in your head long after the workout is complete. The literature suggests that both the kind of high level aerobic exercise provided by IntenSati as well as the positive affirmations may have measurable beneficial effects on cognitive function, mood, self efficacy and self esteem.
Sponsors
Study design
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
1. male or female; 2. 55 or older (resident in OH ElderCare program); 3. able to understand and provide a written informed consent, and agree to adhere to both OH and protocol requirements; 4. meets DSM-IV criteria for drug or alcohol dependence within the previous year; 5. at least a 4 year history of drug/alcohol dependence; 6. receives medical clearance by staff physician.
Exclusion criteria
1. medical conditions that contra-indicate intensive physical exercise; 2. body mass index (BMI) greater than 35 kg/m2; 3. cardiovascular disease including untreated high blood pressure (\>140/90); 4. other factors that in the opinion of the investigators would either jeopardize the safety of the subject and/or the likelihood of study completion, or compromise the validity of the findings.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) Total Recall | Baseline to end of intervention (week 14) | The Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) assesses Verbal learning and memory, immediate recall, delayed recall, and delayed recognition. The HVLT is comprised of three subscales: HVLT Total Recall, HVLT Delayed Recall, and HVLT Delayed Recognition. HVLT Total Recall is the sum of 3 trials in which twelve words are read to and repeated back by subject. The HVLT Total Recall scale ranges from 0-36, the higher score associated with greater verbal learning. |
| Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) Delayed Recall | Baseline to end of intervention (week 14) | Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) assesses Verbal learning and memory, immediate recall, delayed recall, and delayed recognition. The HVLT is comprised of three subscales: HVLT Total Recall, HVLT Delayed Recall, and HVLT Delayed Recognition. HVLT Delayed Recall is administered 20-25 minutes after the HVLT Total Recall. The HVLT Delayed Recall scale ranges from 0-12, the higher score associated with greater retention. |
| Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) Delayed Recognition | Baseline to end of intervention (week 14) | Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) assesses Verbal learning and memory, immediate recall, delayed recall, and delayed recognition. The HVLT is comprised of three subscales: HVLT Total Recall, HVLT Delayed Recall, and HVLT Delayed Recognition. HVLT Delayed Recognition is administered immediately after the HVLT Delayed Recall subscale and involves 12 forced choice responses. The HVLT Delayed Recognition scale ranges from 0-24, the higher score associated with greater recognition ability. |
| Stroop Word | Baseline to end of intervention (week 14) | Stroop Color Word Test assesses cognitive flexibility, resistance to interference from outside stimuli, creativity, psychopathology and cognitive complexity. The Stroop consists of three subscales: Word, Color, and Color-Word. The Stroop Word test is the first subscale administered. The raw score is determined by the number of correct responses within a 90-second period. The scale ranges from 0-100, the higher score the greater the cognitive flexibility. |
| Stroop Color | Baseline to end of intervention (week 14) | Stroop Color Word Test assesses cognitive flexibility, resistance to interference from outside stimuli, creativity, psychopathology and cognitive complexity. The Stroop consists of three subscales: Word, Color, and Color-Word. The Stroop Color test is the second subscale administered. The raw score is determined by the number of correct responses within a 90-second period. The scale ranges from 0-100, the higher score the greater the cognitive flexibility. |
| Stroop Color/Word | Baseline to end of intervention (week 14) | Stroop Color Word Test assesses cognitive flexibility, resistance to interference from outside stimuli, creativity, psychopathology and cognitive complexity. The Stroop consists of three subscales: Word, Color, and Color-Word. The Stroop Color-Word test is the third subscale administered. The raw score is determined by the number of correct responses within a 90-second period. The scale ranges from 0-100, the higher score the greater the cognitive flexibility and resistance to interference. |
| Self-Efficacy for Abstinence | Baseline to end of intervention (week 14) | The Self-Efficacy for Abstinence assessment is adapted from DiClemente (1994)'s Alcohol Abstinence Self-Efficacy. The modified 10-item, 5-point Likert scale (Not at all to Extremely) assesses confidence in abstaining from alcohol. The scale is comprised of four subscales: negative affect, social/positive, physical and other concerns, and withdrawal and urges. Overall abstinence self-efficacy score is calculated by summing each item. The scale ranges from 10-50, the higher the score the higher the self-efficacy for abstinence. |
| Trailmaking Test A | Baseline to end of intervention (week 14) | Trailmaking Test A and B measures cognitive shifting, visual search speed, scanning, speed of processing, mental flexibility, as well as executive functioning. The test generally requires ability to sequence (Parts A and B), ability to shift cognitive set (Part B), and processing speed (Parts A and B). Part A and Part B are scored separately and expressed in terms of the number of seconds it takes the participant to complete each section, the higher the score the longer it took the subject to complete the test. Trailmaking Part A assesses cognitive processing speed. The lower the score the faster the processing speed. |
| Trailmaking Test B | Baseline to end of intervention (week 14) | Trailmaking Test A and B measures cognitive shifting, visual search speed, scanning, speed of processing, mental flexibility, as well as executive functioning. The test generally requires ability to sequence (Parts A and B), ability to shift cognitive set (Part B), and processing speed (Parts A and B). Part A and Part B are scored separately and expressed in terms of the number of seconds it takes the participant to complete each section, the higher the score the longer it took the subject to complete the test. Trailmaking Part B examines executive functioning and ability to shift cognitive set. The lower the score the faster the ability to shift cognitive set. |
| Digit Span | Baseline to end of intervention (week 14) | Digit span measures attention efficiency. The Digit-span task is used to measure verbal working memory. Two subscales, Digits Forward and Digits Backward, were combined for a total scale range from 0-30, the higher the score the better the working memory. |
| Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT) | Baseline to end of intervention (week 14) | Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT) measures verbal fluency. The assessment consists of three trials; the total score is a sum of all three trials. The scale ranges from 0-90, the higher the score the higher the verbal fluency. |
| Wechsler Test of Adult Reading (WTAR) | Baseline to end of intervention (week 14) | Wechsler Test of Adult Reading (WTAR) measures reading ability. The test involves 50 incorrectly spelled words. The score is computed based on the number of correctly pronounced words. The scale ranges from 0-50, the higher the score the higher the reading ability. |
| Quality of Life (QoL) | Baseline to end of intervention (week 14) | The Quality of Life (QoL) assessment is adapted from Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (Q-LES-Q). The 23-item QoL consists of five subscales: physical health/activities, feelings, leisure time activities, social relations, and general activities. The scale ranges from 23-115; the higher score indicates higher quality of life enjoyment and satisfaction. |
| Roesenberg Self Esteem | Baseline to end of intervention (week 14) | The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale is a 10-item, 4-point Likert scale used to assess global self-esteem. The scale ranges from 0-30 with higher scores indicating higher the self-esteem. |
Participant flow
Recruitment details
40 Subjects consented, 4 discontinued prior to completing screening, 36 completed baseline, 4 were ineligible, 32 were randomized.
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| IntenSati IntenSati (a blending of the words intention and sati, the Pali term for mindfulness) combines simple yet vigorous physical movements taken from yoga, martial arts, kickboxing and dance with spoken positive affirmation (e.g. I believe I will succeed, I am strong and I am confident) that are recited simultaneously with the execution of the movements. Indeed, one of the most common reports of IntenSati practitioners is the power of the spoken affirmations to stick in your head long after the workout is complete. The literature suggests that both the kind of high level aerobic exercise provided by IntenSati as well as the positive affirmations may have measurable beneficial effects on cognitive function, mood, self efficacy and self esteem. | 17 |
| Treatment as Usual | 15 |
| Total | 32 |
Withdrawals & dropouts
| Period | Reason | FG000 | FG001 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study | Adverse Event | 1 | 0 |
| Overall Study | completed <70% IntenSati classes | 5 | 0 |
| Overall Study | Withdrawal by Subject | 0 | 3 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | Treatment as Usual | IntenSati | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Categorical <=18 years | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Age, Categorical >=65 years | 1 Participants | 3 Participants | 4 Participants |
| Age, Categorical Between 18 and 65 years | 14 Participants | 14 Participants | 28 Participants |
| Age Continuous | 59 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.2 | 59 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.3 | 59 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.6 |
| Region of Enrollment United States | 15 participants | 17 participants | 32 participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Female | 14 Participants | 3 Participants | 17 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Male | 1 Participants | 14 Participants | 15 Participants |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk | EG001 affected / at risk |
|---|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | — / — | — / — |
| other Total, other adverse events | 1 / 17 | 0 / 15 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 0 / 17 | 1 / 15 |
Outcome results
Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT)
Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT) measures verbal fluency. The assessment consists of three trials; the total score is a sum of all three trials. The scale ranges from 0-90, the higher the score the higher the verbal fluency.
Time frame: Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)
Population: participants completing each arm
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IntenSati | Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT) | COWAT (end of intervention) | 27.82 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 9.43 |
| IntenSati | Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT) | COWAT (baseline) | 29.91 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.26 |
| Treatment as Usual | Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT) | COWAT (baseline) | 31.42 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 9.22 |
| Treatment as Usual | Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT) | COWAT (end of intervention) | 34.17 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.7 |
Digit Span
Digit span measures attention efficiency. The Digit-span task is used to measure verbal working memory. Two subscales, Digits Forward and Digits Backward, were combined for a total scale range from 0-30, the higher the score the better the working memory.
Time frame: Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)
Population: participants completing each arm
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IntenSati | Digit Span | Digit Span (baseline) | 12.55 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.54 |
| IntenSati | Digit Span | Digit Span (end of intervention) | 11.91 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.42 |
| Treatment as Usual | Digit Span | Digit Span (baseline) | 12.33 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.42 |
| Treatment as Usual | Digit Span | Digit Span (end of intervention) | 12.33 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.68 |
Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) Delayed Recall
Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) assesses Verbal learning and memory, immediate recall, delayed recall, and delayed recognition. The HVLT is comprised of three subscales: HVLT Total Recall, HVLT Delayed Recall, and HVLT Delayed Recognition. HVLT Delayed Recall is administered 20-25 minutes after the HVLT Total Recall. The HVLT Delayed Recall scale ranges from 0-12, the higher score associated with greater retention.
Time frame: Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)
Population: participants completing each arm
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IntenSati | Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) Delayed Recall | HVLT Delayed (baseline) | 2.82 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.72 |
| IntenSati | Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) Delayed Recall | HVLT Delayed (end of intervention) | 3.91 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.76 |
| Treatment as Usual | Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) Delayed Recall | HVLT Delayed (baseline) | 5.00 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.41 |
| Treatment as Usual | Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) Delayed Recall | HVLT Delayed (end of intervention) | 3.92 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.94 |
Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) Delayed Recognition
Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) assesses Verbal learning and memory, immediate recall, delayed recall, and delayed recognition. The HVLT is comprised of three subscales: HVLT Total Recall, HVLT Delayed Recall, and HVLT Delayed Recognition. HVLT Delayed Recognition is administered immediately after the HVLT Delayed Recall subscale and involves 12 forced choice responses. The HVLT Delayed Recognition scale ranges from 0-24, the higher score associated with greater recognition ability.
Time frame: Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)
Population: participants completing each arm
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IntenSati | Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) Delayed Recognition | HVLT Delayed Recognition (baseline) | 18.55 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.29 |
| IntenSati | Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) Delayed Recognition | HVLT Delayed Recognition (end of intervention) | 20.27 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.62 |
| Treatment as Usual | Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) Delayed Recognition | HVLT Delayed Recognition (baseline) | 21.33 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.37 |
| Treatment as Usual | Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) Delayed Recognition | HVLT Delayed Recognition (end of intervention) | 22.33 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.43 |
Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) Total Recall
The Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) assesses Verbal learning and memory, immediate recall, delayed recall, and delayed recognition. The HVLT is comprised of three subscales: HVLT Total Recall, HVLT Delayed Recall, and HVLT Delayed Recognition. HVLT Total Recall is the sum of 3 trials in which twelve words are read to and repeated back by subject. The HVLT Total Recall scale ranges from 0-36, the higher score associated with greater verbal learning.
Time frame: Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)
Population: participants completing each arm
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IntenSati | Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) Total Recall | HVLT Total (baseline) | 17.27 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.8 |
| IntenSati | Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) Total Recall | HVLT Total (end of intervention) | 15.27 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.98 |
| Treatment as Usual | Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) Total Recall | HVLT Total (end of intervention) | 17.50 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.5 |
| Treatment as Usual | Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) Total Recall | HVLT Total (baseline) | 18.00 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.15 |
Quality of Life (QoL)
The Quality of Life (QoL) assessment is adapted from Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (Q-LES-Q). The 23-item QoL consists of five subscales: physical health/activities, feelings, leisure time activities, social relations, and general activities. The scale ranges from 23-115; the higher score indicates higher quality of life enjoyment and satisfaction.
Time frame: Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)
Population: participants completing intervention
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IntenSati | Quality of Life (QoL) | QoL (end of intervention) | 92.36 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 14.45 |
| IntenSati | Quality of Life (QoL) | QoL (baseline) | 97.82 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10 |
| Treatment as Usual | Quality of Life (QoL) | QoL (end of intervention) | 90.17 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 12.83 |
| Treatment as Usual | Quality of Life (QoL) | QoL (baseline) | 92.17 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.43 |
Roesenberg Self Esteem
The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale is a 10-item, 4-point Likert scale used to assess global self-esteem. The scale ranges from 0-30 with higher scores indicating higher the self-esteem.
Time frame: Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)
Population: participants completing each arm
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IntenSati | Roesenberg Self Esteem | Rosenberg Self-Esteem (baseline) | 23.18 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.84 |
| IntenSati | Roesenberg Self Esteem | Rosenberg Self-Esteem (end of intervention) | 24.18 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.31 |
| Treatment as Usual | Roesenberg Self Esteem | Rosenberg Self-Esteem (baseline) | 21.83 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.01 |
| Treatment as Usual | Roesenberg Self Esteem | Rosenberg Self-Esteem (end of intervention) | 23.33 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.33 |
Self-Efficacy for Abstinence
The Self-Efficacy for Abstinence assessment is adapted from DiClemente (1994)'s Alcohol Abstinence Self-Efficacy. The modified 10-item, 5-point Likert scale (Not at all to Extremely) assesses confidence in abstaining from alcohol. The scale is comprised of four subscales: negative affect, social/positive, physical and other concerns, and withdrawal and urges. Overall abstinence self-efficacy score is calculated by summing each item. The scale ranges from 10-50, the higher the score the higher the self-efficacy for abstinence.
Time frame: Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)
Population: participants completing each arm
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IntenSati | Self-Efficacy for Abstinence | Self-Efficacy for Abstinence (baseline) | 38.45 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 13.19 |
| IntenSati | Self-Efficacy for Abstinence | Self-Efficacy for Abstinence (end of intervention) | 40.55 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 9.53 |
| Treatment as Usual | Self-Efficacy for Abstinence | Self-Efficacy for Abstinence (baseline) | 39.58 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 9.95 |
| Treatment as Usual | Self-Efficacy for Abstinence | Self-Efficacy for Abstinence (end of intervention) | 41.17 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.06 |
Stroop Color
Stroop Color Word Test assesses cognitive flexibility, resistance to interference from outside stimuli, creativity, psychopathology and cognitive complexity. The Stroop consists of three subscales: Word, Color, and Color-Word. The Stroop Color test is the second subscale administered. The raw score is determined by the number of correct responses within a 90-second period. The scale ranges from 0-100, the higher score the greater the cognitive flexibility.
Time frame: Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)
Population: participants completing each arm
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IntenSati | Stroop Color | Stroop Color (baseline) | 54.27 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 14.19 |
| IntenSati | Stroop Color | Stroop Color (end of intervention) | 58.18 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 14.74 |
| Treatment as Usual | Stroop Color | Stroop Color (baseline) | 64.33 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 16.55 |
| Treatment as Usual | Stroop Color | Stroop Color (end of intervention) | 65.67 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 15.51 |
Stroop Color/Word
Stroop Color Word Test assesses cognitive flexibility, resistance to interference from outside stimuli, creativity, psychopathology and cognitive complexity. The Stroop consists of three subscales: Word, Color, and Color-Word. The Stroop Color-Word test is the third subscale administered. The raw score is determined by the number of correct responses within a 90-second period. The scale ranges from 0-100, the higher score the greater the cognitive flexibility and resistance to interference.
Time frame: Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)
Population: participants completing each arm
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IntenSati | Stroop Color/Word | Stroop Color/Word (end of intervention) | 26.27 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 13.79 |
| IntenSati | Stroop Color/Word | Stroop Color/Word (baseline) | 28.82 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 9.38 |
| Treatment as Usual | Stroop Color/Word | Stroop Color/Word (end of intervention) | 31.17 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 11.51 |
| Treatment as Usual | Stroop Color/Word | Stroop Color/Word (baseline) | 33.08 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 11.26 |
Stroop Word
Stroop Color Word Test assesses cognitive flexibility, resistance to interference from outside stimuli, creativity, psychopathology and cognitive complexity. The Stroop consists of three subscales: Word, Color, and Color-Word. The Stroop Word test is the first subscale administered. The raw score is determined by the number of correct responses within a 90-second period. The scale ranges from 0-100, the higher score the greater the cognitive flexibility.
Time frame: Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)
Population: participants completing each arm
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IntenSati | Stroop Word | Stroop Word (baseline) | 77.36 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 18.48 |
| IntenSati | Stroop Word | Stroop Word (end of intervention) | 83.18 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 14.66 |
| Treatment as Usual | Stroop Word | Stroop Word (end of intervention) | 79.25 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 20.21 |
| Treatment as Usual | Stroop Word | Stroop Word (baseline) | 80.67 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 20.15 |
Trailmaking Test A
Trailmaking Test A and B measures cognitive shifting, visual search speed, scanning, speed of processing, mental flexibility, as well as executive functioning. The test generally requires ability to sequence (Parts A and B), ability to shift cognitive set (Part B), and processing speed (Parts A and B). Part A and Part B are scored separately and expressed in terms of the number of seconds it takes the participant to complete each section, the higher the score the longer it took the subject to complete the test. Trailmaking Part A assesses cognitive processing speed. The lower the score the faster the processing speed.
Time frame: Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)
Population: participants completing trial
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IntenSati | Trailmaking Test A | Trailmaking A (baseline) | 49.82 seconds | Standard Deviation 24.15 |
| IntenSati | Trailmaking Test A | Trailmaking A (end of intervention) | 46.98 seconds | Standard Deviation 21 |
| Treatment as Usual | Trailmaking Test A | Trailmaking A (baseline) | 35.99 seconds | Standard Deviation 12.1 |
| Treatment as Usual | Trailmaking Test A | Trailmaking A (end of intervention) | 38.51 seconds | Standard Deviation 13.25 |
Trailmaking Test B
Trailmaking Test A and B measures cognitive shifting, visual search speed, scanning, speed of processing, mental flexibility, as well as executive functioning. The test generally requires ability to sequence (Parts A and B), ability to shift cognitive set (Part B), and processing speed (Parts A and B). Part A and Part B are scored separately and expressed in terms of the number of seconds it takes the participant to complete each section, the higher the score the longer it took the subject to complete the test. Trailmaking Part B examines executive functioning and ability to shift cognitive set. The lower the score the faster the ability to shift cognitive set.
Time frame: Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)
Population: participants completing each arm
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IntenSati | Trailmaking Test B | Trailmaking B (baseline) | 166.07 seconds | Standard Deviation 66.58 |
| IntenSati | Trailmaking Test B | Trailmaking B (end of intervention) | 187.86 seconds | Standard Deviation 140.23 |
| Treatment as Usual | Trailmaking Test B | Trailmaking B (baseline) | 126.14 seconds | Standard Deviation 54.07 |
| Treatment as Usual | Trailmaking Test B | Trailmaking B (end of intervention) | 125.06 seconds | Standard Deviation 66.27 |
Wechsler Test of Adult Reading (WTAR)
Wechsler Test of Adult Reading (WTAR) measures reading ability. The test involves 50 incorrectly spelled words. The score is computed based on the number of correctly pronounced words. The scale ranges from 0-50, the higher the score the higher the reading ability.
Time frame: Baseline to end of intervention (week 14)
Population: participants completing each arm
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IntenSati | Wechsler Test of Adult Reading (WTAR) | WTAR (end of intervention) | 18.18 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 9.24 |
| IntenSati | Wechsler Test of Adult Reading (WTAR) | WTAR (baseline) | 20.73 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 9.88 |
| Treatment as Usual | Wechsler Test of Adult Reading (WTAR) | WTAR (baseline) | 18.17 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 10.92 |
| Treatment as Usual | Wechsler Test of Adult Reading (WTAR) | WTAR (end of intervention) | 17.50 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 9.91 |