Observational analysis revealed improvements in attention and memory in participants with cognitive and visual impairment, suggesting auditory-based training may be beneficial.
Studies have shown that visual impairment is associated with an increased risk of cognitive decline. Individuals with co-existing cognitive and visual impairments are also at a higher risk of having disability, which can further impact on one’s independence in everyday activities. Computerized Cognitive Training (CCT) is one of the non-pharmacological interventions in managing cognitive decline. Objective: This study investigated the effects of an auditory CTT program in a group of participants with both cognitive and visual impairment. Methods: Sixteen participants were recruited. Participants had cognitive complaints and visual impairment. They received eight sessions of auditory-based CCT once or twice a week for 45 minutes within a 6-week period for each participant. Pre- and post-assessments were conducted before and after the training. Neuropsychological assessments included the Cantonese version of the Mini-Mental State Examination (CMMSE), the digit span forward test, the Chinese version of the Verbal Learning Test (CVVLT), and memory subtest of Neurobehavioral Cognitive Status Examination (NCSE). Pre- and post- mean assessment scores were compared. Results: Mean CMMSE score for this group of participants was 18.1. Significant differences were found in four assessments (digit span forward, CVVLT-Total: CVVLT-first trial, and NCSE-memory). No significant differences were found in the other tests. Additional repeated measures analysis showed age might play a role in CVVLT first trial and CVVLT total scores. Conclusion: The study is limited by its one-group design. The results provide preliminary evidence that auditory-based CCT may be beneficial to attention and memory in people with both cognitive and visual impairment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kuo et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: