ReSET: Strategic Executive Training, cognitive rehabilitation for dysexecutive functioning in Parkinson's disease

Completed

Conditions: neurodegeneratieve aandoeningen (Parkinson), stoornissen in executieve functies
deficits in planning
execution and regulation of goal directed behaviour

Registration Number: NL-OMON36783

Lead Sponsor: niversitair Medisch Centrum Groningen

Brief Summary: Not available

Detailed Description: Not available

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status: Completed

Sex: Not specified

Target Recruitment: 80

Inclusion Criteria

1)Deficient score on the Behavioral Assessment of the Dysexecutive Syndrome (BADS, Wilson et al. 1996), based on the same criteria as in former study by Spikman et al. (2010).
2)Deficient score on the Dysexecutive Questionnaire for patients and proxies (DEX, Wilson et al., 1996), meaning some degree of experienced problems with executive functioning in daily life. The criteria is a total score of 20 or more, based on former study by Spikman et al. (2010).

Exclusion Criteria

-Advanced stage of dementia (SCales for Outcomes in PArkinson*s disease-cognition, Marinus et al., 2003):totalscore 14 or lower or disturbing cognitive problems based on the different SCOPA-cog scores of subscales (memory, perception, language).
-Severe depression (Hospitial Anxiety and Depression Scale, Zigmond & Snaith, 1983): defined
as a score of 15 or higher on the different scales.
-Symptoms like hallucinations and delusions (Neuropsychiatric Inventory, Cummings,
1994):defined as frequency of 3/4 and severity as 2/3 per scale.
-Impulsive-compulsive disorders (ICD's) (Questionnaire for Impulsive-compulsive disorder in
Parkinson's disease, Weintraub et al., 2009).
-Cerebral comorbidity
-Stage 5 of Hoehn & Yahr, stage 4 needs to be judged by the neuropsychologist who gives the
treatment

Study & Design

Study Type: Interventional

Study Design: Not specified

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
<p>Improvement of executive functioning on participation level, defined as a<br /><br>significant difference between pre- and postmeasurement on the Role Resumption<br /><br>List (Spikman et al., 2010).</p><br>

Secondary Outcome Measures