Index - 2019 - Cognitive Rehabilitation of Memory

You might also like

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 5

INDEX

Note: Page numbers followed by f indicate figures, t indicate tables, and b indicate boxes.

A C
Alzheimer’s disease California Verbal Learning Test (CVLT),
Deese/Roediger–McDermott paradigm 71–74, 84–85, 102f, 162–163, 180
in patients with, 125f Cardiosomatic coupling, 13–14, 15f
memantine, impact of, 36, 37f Chi-square tests, 40, 52
repetition lag procedure, 132 CIMT. See Constrained-induced movement
transcranial direct current stimulation, therapy (CIMT)
180 Clinical scales and outcome measurement,
Amnestic syndrome 45
confabulations, reduction of, 174–177, Cochrane reviews
176f on fluoxetine, 31b
epidemiology, 161–163 for neuropsychological disorders in
errorless learning, 163–170 stroke, 10–11, 11t
etiology, 161–163 systematic scoring system, 37–38, 37f
guidelines, 162–164 Cogmed QM, 119–120
orientation training, 173–174 Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), 20–21
retrieval practice, 170–173 Cognitive reserve, 3
semantic structuring for memory Compensation, 4–5
performance in, 104 external, 8–9
vanishing cues method, 163–170, internal, 5–6, 76–77
165f Compensation of memory disorders through
Aphasia, 168–169 external memory aids, 149–160
Atkinson and Shiffrin model, 76, 77f, Concealment, 25–26
108–109, 108f Conceptual aspects of treatment studies,
Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder meaning of, 66–69
(ADHD) Confabulations, 174–177, 176f
neurofeedback, 181–182 Consolidation, memory impairments, 76–77
working memory training in, 115 Constrained-induced movement therapy
Autobiographical memory training, (CIMT), 6, 18–19
135–138 Context-memory, 128–129
Craniopharyngioma, 128
CVLT. See California Verbal Learning Test
B (CVLT)
Barthel Index (BI), 14–16, 20
Bilateral orbitofrontal cortex (BOFC) D
lesions, 101–102, 103t Declarative memory, 163–164
Binary data, 38–40 Deep encoding, 89–114
and risk reduction, 40–44 Deese/Roediger–McDermott paradigm,
special meaning, 38–40 123–124, 124f
Brain injury, acquired, 30b Delayed memory, 121

195
196 Index

Double-blind study, 28–30 G


Drop-outs, 32–36 Geriatric Depression Scale, 139–140
Dual trace model, 123–128 Glasgow coma scale (GCS) score, 13–14
Guidelines for
treating mild to moderate impaired
E patients, 144–147
EBM. See Evidence-based medicine (EBM) the usage of external memory aids, 158f
Ecological validity, 19–20
Electronic memory aids, 150–156 H
Encoding process, 85–89, 85f, 87f Herpes encephalitis, 161
Episodic memory, 119–123, 161
Errorless learning method
I
in domain-specific memory impaired
Instrumental Activities of Daily Living
patients, 168–170, 169f
(iADL scales), 20
in memory-impaired patients, 163–168
Intention to treat (ITT) analysis, 26–27
Evidence-based medicine (EBM)
Item-specific memory, 128–129
Cochrane reviews, 10–11, 11t
components, 9–10
definition, 9–10 K
guidelines, 10–13 Korsakoff’s amnesics, 104–106, 165–166
levels of evidence, 22–24, 23t memory performance of patients with, 90,
quality of life, 16–17 91f
randomized controlled trials, 32t proactive interference on list learning in,
bias evaluation, 37–38 92, 93f
drop-outs, 32–36, 34f
evaluation equality, 26–28 L
observational equality, 28–31 Last observation carried forward (LOCF)
structural equality, 24–26 analysis, 36
single-case experimental designs Left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (LPFC)
definition, 55–57 lesions, 101–102, 103t
problems, 57–63
RoBINT Scale, 64–66 M
statistical analysis of teatment studies Maladaptation, 6–7
binary outcome measures, 38–40, 42t Memory aids
ordinal data, 45 classification, 158–160, 159t
parametric evaluation, 45–47 electronic, 150–156
power calculation, 47–53, 50–51f external, 85–86, 149, 159t
risk and risk reduction, 40–44, 43t guideline for usage, 160
treatment effects, 13–18, 17t spontaneous use of, 149–150
External memory aids, 168 Memory books, 150, 166–168, 166t, 167f
Memory errors, 174–175
hits and false positive in memory tests,
F 123–124
Far-transfer effect, 19–22, 121, 122f Memory impairments, 162
Frontal System Behavior Scale (FrSBS), 83 compensatory treatments, 149–160
Functional independence measure (FIM), consolidation, 76–77
14–16, 20 electronic memory aids, 150–156
Index 197

German guideline for treating patients Mnemonic methods, 76–85, 78f


with, 158, 158f Modified Story Memory Technique
interference effects, 109–110, 109t (mSMT), 82–83, 84f
neurofeedback, 181–182 Multiple sclerosis (MS)
persistence of, 74–76 cognitive training, 33–34, 35f
prevalence, 71–74, 72–73t, 73f modified Story Memory Technique
recovery, 74–76 treatment, 84f
transcranial direct current stimulation,
179–181
treatment for, 74–76, 76f N
Memory performance N-back task, 131
animal research on recovery of, 74–76 Near transfer effect, 19–22, 134
repetition lag procedure, 128–135, Neurofeedback (NF), 67b, 181–182
129–130f NeuroPage, 150–153, 151f
working memory training, 115–119, Neuropsychological neglect therapy, 52
115–116f Neurorehabilitation, 1–9
Memory rehabilitation Noncognitive treatments of memory impairments,
autobiographical memory training, 179–182
135–138
consolidation, 123–135 O
deep vs. shallow encoding, 89–96 Ordinal data, 45
encoding process, 85–89 Orientation training, 173–174
guidelines, 75–76, 76f, 85, 144–147,
144f
randomized controlled trial P
modified Story Memory Technique, Papez circuit, 74–75, 126–128, 161
82–85 Parametric evaluation of treatment effects,
on visual imagery to improve memory 45–47
performance, 79–82 Part of the Multiple Sclerosis Functional
recollection training, 108–114 Composite Score (PASAT), 44
repetition lag procedure, 128–135 PEDro scale, 38, 38f
semantic structuring, 97–114 Per-protocol (PP), 27–28
SenseCam, 135–138 Placebo vs. verum treatments, 28, 29t,
spaced retrieval, 138–143 30–31
transfer appropriate processing, 97–107 Planning and Execution Assistant and
via teaching patients mnemonic strategies, Trainer (PEAT) software, 154–155
76–79, 78f Posterior cerebral artery (PCA), 54
Mild to moderate memory disorders Post-hoc statistical testing, 107f
German guidelines for treatment, 87f, 91f, Post-stroke memory dysfunction, in
144–147, 144f nondemented patients, 71, 72t
guidelines, 144–147 Power calculation, 47–53, 50–51f
semantic structuring, 97–107, 98t, Preview, question, repeat, state, test
103f (PQRST) method, 76–77, 97–98
transfer appropriate processing, 97–107, Proactive interference, 92–94, 93f
99f Problems with group studies on treatment
Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), effects, 53–55
139–140, 180–181 Psychotherapy, 2
198 Index

R definition, 55–57
Randomization, 23–25, 64 problems, 57–63
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 19, RoBINT Scale, 64–66, 65f
32t, 53 in teaching severely-memory-impaired
bias evaluation, 37–38 patient, 166–168, 167f
concealment, 25–26 Smartphones, 149
drop-outs, 32–36 Source-monitoring task, 131
evaluation equality, 26–28 Spaced retrieval, 138–143, 141f,
modified Story Memory Technique, 170–171
82–85 Standard deviation (SD), 50
observational equality, 28–31 Stroke, 10–11, 11t, 132–133, 180–181
structural equality, 24–26 Subjective Memory Complaint
RBMT. See Rivermead behavioral memory Questionnaire, 139–140
test (RBMT)
Recall memory performance, 86–87, 98–99,
103t T
Recency judgments, 175–177 TBI. See Traumatic brain injury (TBI)
Regression analysis, 46–47, 86–87 Transcranial direct current stimulation
Rehabilitation of Memory, 76 (tDCS), 179–181
Relative risk reduction, 41 anodal stimulation, 179
Remembering by familiarity, 124–128 cathodal stimulation, 179
Remembering by recollection, 124–128 Transfer appropriate processing model,
Repetition lag procedure, 128–135, 95–107, 97f, 98t, 99f
129–130f Traumatic brain injury (TBI), 149,
Residual memory performance, 163, 173 171–172
Restitution, 3–5 consolidation deficits, 114
Restitutive training, 156–157 modified Story Memory Technique
Retrieval practice, 170–173 treatment, 84f
Rivermead behavioral memory test NeuroPage, impact of, 150–152
(RBMT), 19–20, 79–80, 133, 163 orientation training in, 173–174
RoBINT Scale, 64–66, 65f Treadmill exercise, 33
Treatment of severely impaired, amnestic patients,
S 161–177
SCED. See Single-case experimental designs
(SCED)
“Selbsterhaltungstherapie,” 135–136 V
Self-order pointing task, 131 Vanishing Cues method
Self-rated questionnaires, 22 in domain-specific memory impaired
Semantic structuring, 97–114, 97f, patients, 168–170
98t, 103f in memory-impaired patients, 163–168,
SenseCams, 135–138, 136f, 159–160, 165f
173–174 Vascular dementia (VD), 68b
Sensorimotor rhythm (SMR), 66–67 Visual field loss, 4–5
Serial clustering, 7–8, 7f Visual imagery, to improve memory
Single-case experimental designs (SCED), performance, 79–82, 81–82t
57–58f, 150–152 Visuospatial working memory,
baseline, stability of, 60, 61f 119–120
Index 199

W to improve episodic memory, 119–123


Wechsler memory scale score, 80–82 on neuropsychological test, 116–117,
WoMe training, 121, 134 116f
Word-fluency tasks, 121 in patients with acquired brain damage,
Working memory training, 115–119 117
in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and semantic structuring, 120–121
115
on daily life measures, 115f Z
for encoding and retrieval, 119, 119f Z-scores, 50–51, 172–173

You might also like