How To Repair Frontal Lobe Damage

Introduction

Deficits in frontal and executive function are among the commonest causes of disability following encephalon injury. This disability affects planning, strategy application, self-regulation, inhibition, goal-directed behavior, initiation, and insight (Tranel et al., 1994; Stuss and Levine, 2002). Although primarily associated with frontal lobe damage, these deficits tin can occur following a host of other conditions affecting interconnected brain role through axonal or white matter changes, such as traumatic encephalon injury (Levine et al., 1998), multiple sclerosis (McDonald and Ron, 1999), ischemic white matter affliction (Swartz et al., 2008), crumbling (Raz, 2000), the dementias (Neary et al., 1998), and psychiatric weather (Cohen and Servan-Schreiber, 1992; Mayberg, 1997).

In spite of the societal costs associated with this disability, there are no widely accepted standardized interventions targeting these capacities. In a contempo review of the literature, we identified 55 studies on rehabilitation of executive or frontal lobe function (Levine et al., 2008). Only xvi% of these met criteria for class I prove sufficient to guide treatment (see also Cicerone et al., 2000, 2005; Rohling et al., 2009). Research in this area is limited by heterogeneity of patient samples, lack of control groups, lack of theoretically based intervention protocols, and limited outcome assessment (run across as well Levine and Downey-Lamb, 2002).

Goal management training (GMT; Robertson, 1996; Levine et al., 2000b, 2007) is based on theory of sustained or vigilant attention (Robertson and Garavan, 2000). Ongoing activation of the right frontal-thalamic-parietal sustained attention system is required to actively, endogenously maintain higher order goal states in working memory. When the sustained attending system is compromised, habits, or environmental weather may oppose and displace higher order goals, resulting in cue-dependent or distracted behavior that is a hallmark of patients with attentional and executive deficits. For example, if i has to deviate from a habitual route to postal service a letter of the alphabet, the goal of posting the letter must be actively maintained in working memory en route in order to prevent habit (i.e., taking the usual route) from displacing the goal.

The brain's sustained attention system is distributed, mediated non only by the nodal correct lateralized dorsolateral prefrontal, posterior parietal, and thalamic regions (Posner and Petersen, 1990) simply also by their interconnections with ascending lesser-upward systems (Corbetta and Shulman, 2002), accounting for the ubiquity of attentional deficits manifesting as dysexecutive syndrome or impaired goal management among patients with diverse forms of brain disease, although amodal goal management deficits are expected to be greatest in patients with frontal lobe brain damage. In this framework, sustained attending is viewed as crucial to supporting various processes collectively referred to equally executive or frontal lobe function (Stuss and Levine, 2002; Stuss and Alexander, 2007), even though these may exist dissociated under specific experimental weather condition.

The chief objective of GMT of is to railroad train patients to stop ongoing behavior in order to define goal hierarchies (Duncan et al., 1996) and monitor performance. This is achieved through instructional textile, interactive tasks, word of patients' real-life deficits, and homework assignments (run across Materials and Methods). Exogenous, content-complimentary cues (i.eastward., random tones) can serve every bit a prosthetic in patients with sustained attention deficits (Manly et al., 2002; Fish et al., 2007) through the break of automatic responding and facilitation of the resumption of supervisory attentional command (Norman and Shallice, 1986). When random tones are presented during performance of the Sustained Attention to Response Task (SART; Robertson et al., 1997, see Materials and Methods) the classic frontoparietal neural signature of sustained attention is disengaged (O'Connor et al., in printing), suggesting that the tones tin can serve as an external prosthetic for what are normally endogenous attentional processes. GMT incorporates this principle past introducing external prompts during the performance of analogs to experimental tasks, such as SART-like tasks and complex tasks, such as faux real-life tasks (Levine et al., 2007), then promoting internalization of these prompts through self-cueing. Mindfulness meditation (Kabat-Zinn, 1990) is incorporated toward developing a skill of repetitively bringing one'southward listen to the present to monitor ongoing beliefs, goal states, and the correspondence between them. The intervention also includes existent-life examples provided past the trainer and the patient to illustrate goal attainment failures and successes, promoting awareness of alterations in goal states, and in session practice on complex tasks that mimic real-life tasks that are problematic for patients with executive deficits (e.g., planning a party).

Goal Management Preparation has been evaluated in patients with traumatic encephalon injury (Levine et al., 2000b; Fish et al., 2007), normal crumbling (Levine et al., 2007; van Hooren et al., 2007), and in case studies of patients with focal cerebellar impairment (Schweizer et al., 2008) and encephalitis (Levine et al., 2000b). Significant effects in support of GMT were found for functioning on laboratory analogs of real-life tasks requiring complex attentional skills (Levine et al., 2000b, 2007) and surveys of real-life attentional and executive deficits (Levine et al., 2007; van Hooren et al., 2007). Yet at that place are no studies in which a fully expanded GMT has been systematically compared to a viable alternative treatment. The first study of GMT, although employing a randomized control trial, consisted of a brief (1 h) version of the protocol (Levine et al., 2000b) every bit a rehabilitation probe or proof-of-principle in patients with traumatic encephalon injury (see also Fish et al., 2007 for a like application of GMT). Studies of GMT in aging (Levine et al., 2007; van Hooren et al., 2007) used longer protocol, but lacked an agile control grouping, and, in the instance of Levine et al. (2007), combined GMT with other interventions.

In this written report, patients with brain injury (mostly stroke) were assigned to a xiv-h, 7 calendar week version of GMT or a control group consisting of standard-of-care treatment. Outcome, assessed immediately later training and at 4 months post-training, was assessed with a bombardment of experimental and clinical neuropsychological tests and outcome questionnaires. Each measure was selected for its capacity to assess specific processes supported past sustained attention and for its position along a continuum of ecological validity, spanning from laboratory reaction time tests to questionnaires sensitive to real-life consequence. The SART (Robertson et al., 1997), a computerized test involving speeded responses to lengthy target series, was considered a measure out of "most transfer" in that GMT itself (simply not the command condition) employs SART-like tasks. Unlike types of errors on the SART can reflect either attentional drift or resolution of response competition (O'Connell et al., 2009), both of which are related to failures of sustained attending. As the SART provides reaction fourth dimension data, we besides examined the upshot of GMT on variability of response time, which is sensitive to frontal brain damage (Stuss et al., 2003) and associated with indices of integrated brain function in healthy individuals (McIntosh et al., 2008). While the SART directly assessed sustained attention processes targeted by GMT, the remaining tests, while more than removed from pure sustained attention, appraise behaviors that should all the same be supported past sustained attending, and in turn affected by GMT even though they were non straight trained. In this sense, they are considered measures of "far transfer." These included two desktop tests, the Tower Test from the Delis–Kaplan executive function system (D–KEFS; Delis et al., 2001), a examination of visuospatial planning, and the Hotel Test (Manly et al., 2002), which mimics a real-life multitasking situation. Questionnaires (Broadbent et al., 1982; Burgess et al., 1996) focused on self-reported executive deficits in real-life.

Materials and Methods

Participants

Twenty adults aged 23–lxx were recruited from metropolitan hospitals in the Toronto surface area. Criteria for inclusion were a focal brain injury stabilized in the chronic phase of recovery (minimum 6 months post-injury) and executive operation problems, such as impaired planning, decision making, self-regulation as determined by clinician referrals and intake interview. Nosotros did non restrict participation to those with impaired functioning on traditional tests of frontal lobe part as these tests are of limited utility in the assessment of existent-life executive deficits of interest in this written report (Shallice and Burgess, 1991; Levine et al., 1998; Stuss and Levine, 2002). Criteria for exclusion, based on review of records, included impaired basic linguistic, mnemonic, motor, or perceptual part that would interfere with the patient's ability to engage with the training. Additionally, patients with Axis I psychiatric disorders were excluded. The study was canonical by the Baycrest Enquiry Ethics Board. All patients gave informed consent for participation.

The first 15 patients were assigned to GMT or control groups (hereafter referred to as brain health workshop; BHW). GMT and BHW were each delivered in groups of 2–4 participants. Twelve of the xv participants were randomly assigned; the remaining two participants were assigned to the BHW grouping because their schedules did not permit assignment to the GMT group. One patient randomly assigned to GMT failed to complete the training. We thus had N's of half dozen and eight in the GMT and BHW groups, respectively. Nosotros ran an boosted GMT group that contained v participants (three stroke, one TBI, one tumor), resulting in total N's of xi and eight for the GMT and BHW groups, respectively. Although the last 5 participants were not randomly assigned (i.due east., they were all in a GMT group), ancillary analyses (see Results) indicated that the handling effects described below cannot be deemed for by this grouping.

Participants in the GMT and BHW groups were matched for age, gender, education, and neuropsychological exam performance (all p's for group comparisons on these variables >0.3; meet Table 1). The GMT group contained half dozen patients with stroke, iv patients with traumatic brain injury, and one patient with tumor. The BHW group contained five patients with stroke, and one patient each with traumatic brain injury, epilepsy (status post right temporal lobe resection), and heterotopia. Lesion information was documented with clinical imaging. In most cases, lesions were located in the frontal lobes or frontal systems (basal ganglia, cerebellum, thalamus), or diffusely in the cases of traumatic brain injury.

Table 1. Demographic and neuropsychological test data.

Intervention

Both GMT and BHW were administered in 7 2 h sessions (see Table 2) following a script with Powerpoint slides and participant workbooks. Session 1 was devoted to defining the concept of absentmindedness and raising sensation of absentminded errors in daily life. In Session ii, absentminded errors were operationalized as inappropriate expressions of habit (i.east., the "automatic airplane pilot"). This is when the "End" concept was introduced. In Session 3, working memory was defined as the mind'south "mental blackboard" for on-line maintenance of goals. Given the sensitivity of working retention to lark, frequent checking (i.e., stopping) is required to ensure that the contents of working memory is matched to appropriate goal states. Mindfulness-based meditation (Kabat-Zinn, 1990; Segal et al., 2002) was introduced to enhance awareness toward current behavior, feelings, and goal states. Session 4 emphasized stating the goal every bit a method to activate goal representations post-obit stopping and bringing ane'south mind to the present. Session v dealt with decision making in the context of competing goals and the utilise of to-practice lists. In Session 6, participants practiced splitting unwieldy goals into subgoals. The final session involved checking, or stopping to interrupt ongoing beliefs for the purposes of output monitoring.

Tabular array 2. Description of goal management training (GMT) and brain health workshop (BHW) interventions.

Each session contained narrative examples to illustrate concepts. Patients' own real-life examples were solicited and used whenever possible. Analogs of experimental and real-life tasks were used to induce experiential learning of the concepts within the sessions. Homework assignments between sessions included monitoring of absentminded slips and successes (i.e., recovery from or abstention of slips), and daily mindfulness practice. The aforementioned trainer (either Brian Levine or Charlene O'Connor) conducted both GMT and BHW. Recordings of sessions were periodically reviewed to ensure consistency of administration.

Encephalon Health Workshop was matched to GMT for session length and contact with the facilitator. Information technology comprised educational materials and lifestyle interventions employed in rehabilitation centers (see Table 2). Educational sessions addressed brain office and dysfunction, neuroplasticity, and cerebral psychological and neuropsychological principles apropos memory, attending, language, perception, and motor skills. The lifestyle sessions included data on stress reduction, sleep hygiene, energy direction, exercise, communication, and diet. Within session and homework activities included reading assignments, testing of acquired cognition from the educational materials, mental games (e.m., word finding, mazes), and logs of advice and sleep habits.

Effect Measures

The efficacy of treatment was assessed via a bombardment of standardized and experimental tests of executive functioning and attending and questionnaires that ranged from "near transfer" measures methodologically close to the tasks incorporated into GMT to "far transfer" measures that, while theoretically supported by GMT, were not directly addressed in the intervention (see Table 2). Issue assessments were conducted immediately pre- and postal service- intervention, and at 4 month follow-up by an examiner blind to group membership. The examiner was from a different lab than that from which the groups were assigned and run, and she had no access to grouping membership data.

The SART (Robertson et al., 1997) is a go/no-go task in which single-digit numbers are presented randomly every 1150 ms. Participants are instructed to answer to all numbers (get stimuli) except for a unmarried no-go number, appearing 11% of the time. Dependent variables include errors of commission (responding to no-go stimuli), errors of omission (not responding to go stimuli), reaction fourth dimension, and reaction time variability (coefficient of variation). Errors of commission and omission tin be dissociated both behaviorally and at the brain level (ERP), with the erstwhile reflecting resolution of response contest and the latter reflecting attentional drift (O'Connell et al., 2009).

The D–KEFs Tower Test (Delis et al., 2001) is a measure out of visuospatial planning that is modeled on the Belfry of London exam (Shallice, 1982), in which disks must be placed on dowels to friction match models of increasing complexity, with "rules" constraining the movement of the disks (i.e., it is forbidden to identify a larger disk on top of a smaller disk). For the purposes of this written report, the standardized test was split into two forms past alternate items. We examined the total achievement score and the number of rule violations (expressed as a proportion of items completed).

The Hotel Task (Manly et al., 2002), modeled on the Half-dozen Chemical element Examination (Shallice and Burgess, 1991), is a desktop model of a real-life multitasking situation in which the participant plays the role of a hotel manager with five different tasks. In club to maximize functioning and complete the tasks effectively, participants must distribute their time as across tasks within the 15-min allotment. The dependent variables are the number of tasks completed and the deviation fourth dimension, defined as the number of seconds spent in a higher place or below the optimal time of 3 min per job.

Questionnaires were used to assess everyday function that is not typically captured by laboratory tests. The Dysexecutive Questionnaire (DEX; Burgess et al., 1996) assesses cognitive changes associated with executive functioning in the areas of inhibition, positive and negative affect, memory, and intention. Although the DEX contains self- and other-rated forms, we were unable to obtain sufficient data from pregnant others to include these ratings in our analyses. The Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ; Broadbent et al., 1982) addresses daily life mental errors on the dimensions of distractibility, blunders, names, and retention. Finally, we administered a questionnaire addressing daily life absentmindedness and goal attainment that was purpose-built for this study.

Results

Data were analyzed using a two × iii mixed-design ANOVA that treated Group (GMT, BHW) as a between-subjects factor and Session (baseline, post-intervention, follow-up) as a within-subjects variable. Group × Session interactions (across the 3 sessions and separately for baseline vs. post-intervention and baseline vs. follow-upwards) were decomposed with simple effects analyses of session effects within groups and planned paired contrasts of baseline vs. mail service-intervention and baseline vs. follow-up differences. A similar decomposition approach was taken for principal furnishings of examination session. That is, session effects were probed separately for each grouping. Results are reported in Table three and Figure 1. As each measure reflected distinct processes at different levels of ecological validity, experiment-wise error was not corrected. Interpretation of the force of experimental effects is provided with effect size statistics, including fractional eta-squared (- reflecting the percentage of variance accounted for by the issue) for ANOVA results and Cohen's d for follow-up univariate tests.

Table 3. Outcome data.

Figure 1. Effects of GMT vs. BHW on SART errors of omission (tiptop left), SART coefficient of variation (top correct), Tower Test Accomplishment Score (bottom left) and Belfry Exam rule violations per detail (lesser correct). *Significantly unlike from baseline for GMT. The symbols represent the mean values and the mistake bars stand for the SEM.

Sustained Attention to Response Task

At that place was a significant Group × Session interaction for SART omission errors, F _(2,thirty) = four.872, p < 0.02, due to a reduction in errors across sessions for the GMT grouping, F _(1.1,10.1) = 7.255, p < 0.03, simply non the control group (see Table 3; Figure 1, tiptop left). The GMT grouping's change from baseline to mail-intervention, t _(ix) = 2.668, p < 0.03, d = one.12, held at follow-up, t _(ix) = 2.796, p < 0.03, d = 1.23. There was besides a primary result of committee errors across all three sessions, F _(ii,30) = 3.509, p < 0.05, but this was reliable only for the GMT group at baseline vs. follow-up, t _(nine) = two.355, p < 0.05, d = 0.78 (see Table iii).There was a marginally meaning main issue of Session for coefficient of variation of SART response times at baseline vs. follow-up, F _(1,15) = four.279, p < .06, that was accounted for by the GMT group, t _(nine) = 2.410, p < 0.04, d = 0.993 (come across Table 3; Figure ane, superlative correct).

Belfry Test

In that location were no reliable interactions on the D–KEFs Tower Exam, although the Group × Session interaction for the achievement score approached significance at baseline vs. follow-up, F _(1,16) = iii.942, p < 0.07, Simple effects of test session were observed for the GMT group, F _(2,twenty) = 11.355, p < 0.002, holding at both post-intervention, t _(x) = −2.437, p < 0.04, d = 0.746, and follow-upward, t ₍₁₀₎ = −4.632, p < 0.002, d = 1.48; at that place were no significant simple effects for the BHW group (see Table 3; Figure one, lesser left). There was a main effect of exam session for dominion violations, F _(1.1,18.0) = 13.15, p < 0.002, that was significant for the GMT grouping, F _(1.i,xi.3) = fifteen.21, p < 0.003, (holding at post-intervention, t ₍₁₀₎ = 4.037, p < 0.003, d = ane.86, and follow-up, t ₍₁₀₎ = 3.903, p < 0.004, d = one.54) merely non for the BHW group ( come across Table 3; Figure 1, bottom correct).

Hotel Examination

In that location were no effects on number of tasks attempted, likely owing to ceiling effects (see Table iii). At that place was a Group × Session interaction for total deviation time, F _(ii,32) = 4.260, p < 0.03, Contrary to expectation, this was accounted for by an increase in divergence time for the GMT group at mail service-training, t ₍₁₀₎ = −2.872, p < 0.02, d = 0.88, meaning that the patients in GMT distributed their time less consistently across tasks at post-preparation equally compared to baseline. This finding did non concord at follow-upwards.

Questionnaires

There were no significant main furnishings or interactions on the questionnaires. Inside-group exploratory analyses were also non-meaning, although the change in the GMT group from baseline to mail-intervention was marginally significant, t _(ix) = 2.090, p < 0.07, d = 0.698 (see Table 3).

Additional Analyses

Equally the last five GMT participants were not randomly assigned, nosotros conducted ancillary analyses to determine if they were systematically dissimilar from the kickoff six participants randomly assigned to GMT. There were no meaning differences on the baseline neuropsychological tests (every bit listed in Table 1; all p'south > 0.4, except for Trail Making, Function B, t(9) = ii.115, p < 0.07, where the showtime group was slower). Nor were there differences on whatsoever of the pre-intervention forms of the upshot measures (all p's > 0.5).

A 2 × iii mixed-design ANOVA that treated Group (first half dozen or last five GMT participants) as a between-subjects factor and Session (baseline, post-intervention, follow-upwards) as a within-subjects factor revealed no significant main furnishings or interactions involving Group for the SART (all p'southward > 0.five). For the Tower test, there was a not-significant Group × Session interaction for rule violations, F _(1.2,10.6) = 3.75, p < 0.08, attributable to a more reliable upshot at follow-up testing for the first six GMT participants, t(five) = iii.993, p < 0.02, d = ane.98) than for the concluding five GMT participants, t(iv) = ii.281, p < 0.09, d = ane.99). In that location were no meaning main effects of interactions involving Group for the Tower achievement score (p'south > 0.4). For the Hotel Examination, there were no meaning effects on number of tasks attempted (p's > 0.3). For Hotel Test difference time, in that location was a not-meaning trend for a group effect, F _(one,nine) = 3.761, p < 0.09 with higher scores for the last five participants as compared to the first six participants. There were no meaning main effects or interactions involving Group for the questionnaires.

Discussion

Goal Management Training is a theoretically derived intervention for executive functioning deficits intended to promote a mindful arroyo to problem-solving past raising awareness of attentional lapses and reinstating cognitive command when behavior is mismatched to the ongoing goal hierarchy (GMT; Robertson, 1996; Levine et al., 2000b, 2007). In this study of patients with stable brain lesions and self-reported executive deficits, GMT was associated with reduced attentional lapses, increased behavioral consistency, and improved problem-solving functioning.

At that place is currently petty high-quality show in back up of neuropsychological interventions for executive functioning deficits (Levine et al., 2008). GMT differs from other preparation protocols that take shown transfer (e.g., Jaeggi et al., 2008; Persson and Reuter-Lorenz, 2008) in that it is a metacognitive intervention that combines educational activity, narrative, task functioning and feedback, and incorporation of participants' own personal task failures and successes, rather than simple repetitive practice on an automated job. It is therefore more intrinsically engaging and tailored to the private than other methods.

Previous grouping studies with GMT have demonstrated positive furnishings on both analogs of real-life tasks and questionnaires, only these lacked an active command grouping (Levine et al., 2007; van Hooren et al., 2007) or used an abbreviated version of the protocol. In this study, participants were assigned to either GMT or the BHW, matched to GMT for contact with the trainer and other non-specific factors important to intervention outcomes. Moreover, the BHW actively engaged participants with information, materials, and activities that reflect current standards of care. There was no compunction amongst BHW participants. Participants in both groups informally reported that they benefited from the training. Although this sample was small-scale and heterogenous, effect size estimates indicated moderate, and in almost cases, large preparation furnishings.

Goal Management Preparation emphasizes bolstering of sustained attention to maintain awareness of goal states and output monitoring. Accordingly, there were significant furnishings specific to the GMT group for errors on the SART. In detail, there was a reduction of errors of omission (i.e., not responding to go items) following GMT, merely not BHW, that held at follow-up. These errors reflect attentional drift and loss of elevation-down control leading to mistimed responses (O'Connell et al., 2009). Errors of commission, reflecting resolution of response conflict as well equally sustained attention, were also specifically reduced post-obit the GMT, although this effect was significant only in the baseline–follow-upwardly comparison. Instability or variability of responses is a signature effect of frontal brain impairment (Stuss et al., 2003) and traumatic encephalon injury (Stuss et al., 1989, 1994) that is inversely correlated with "encephalon dissonance" or complexity of neural responses (McIntosh et al., 2008). GMT was associated with reduced response time variability on the SART. Although this departure reached significance only for the baseline–follow-up comparison, this finding suggests that increasing consistency of responding (or inversely, variability of neural responses) may be an important event target for executive functioning rehabilitation.

The positive findings for the SART are considered evidence of well-nigh transfer in that participants reliably demonstrated improved performance on a task that was directly addressed in GMT. The Tower test is a visuospatial problem-solving test that, while supported past processes trained in GMT, has picayune direct overlap with elements of GMT. Although less reliable than the SART, the effects on the Tower exam indicated meaning improvements (improved performance, reduced dominion violations) that were not observed for the BHW group, supporting the efficacy of GMT on a multifactorial far transfer exam.

Results on the Hotel examination were opposite to expectation in that GMT participants showed greater deviations from the optimal per-chore time allocation than did the BHW participants at post- intervention. This suggests that GMT may have been associated with a change in participants' arroyo to the job that was inconsistent with the original intent of the time deviation measure. Indeed, in both the Hotel task and in multitasking exercises that are role of the GMT intervention, participants are told that they must sample from all of the task elements, but they are not required to-do so equally. It is possible that they adopted asymmetric task completion as a strategy to focus on elements of the test where they felt most capable.

The ultimate far transfer of a behavioral intervention is to the daily life of the trainees. GMT is designed to promote generalization through intrinsic engagement and emphasis on patients' real-life issues. It is notoriously hard to reliably mensurate daily life function in patients with executive functioning deficits due to brain disease. This lack of reliability is compounded in the case of assessing intervention effects. That is, the ability to find a modify in behavior is by necessity limited by the reliability of measurement at a single time bespeak. Alternatives to assessing real-life beliefs include laboratory analogs of real-life tasks (Shallice and Burgess, 1991; Levine et al., 1998), such equally the Hotel job, and event questionnaires (Burgess et al., 1998; Levine et al., 2000a). Nosotros failed to find effects of GMT on 3 such questionnaires, the DEX, the CFQ, and a purpose-built questionnaire designed to assess goal management application. In previous studies, significant effects following GMT were observed on the DEX (Levine et al., 2007) and the CFQ (van Hooren et al., 2007). These studies employed good for you older participants who likely have higher insight into their deficits relative to patients. In the present study, we were unable to obtain significant other ratings that would likely be more than sensitive to deficits and alter than cocky-ratings, particularly for participants with executive deficits due to encephalon disease (Burgess et al., 1998). It is as well possible that participants' responses may have reflected a combination of increased insight into deficits subsequently preparation, which would increment particular endorsement and piece of work confronting demonstration of grooming effects.

The data presented support the claims that prior positive findings with GMT were not due to non-specific intervention furnishings such every bit professional attending or group dynamics. Furthermore, the data indicate that GMT promotes far transfer to untrained tests of executive functioning, and that these changes are lasting. Even so, limitations of this written report qualify the findings and provide direction for time to come research. The trial was simply partially randomized in that two participants were assigned to BHW due to scheduling constraints and the final five participants were assigned to GMT. It is unlikely that the pregnant findings could be accounted for by the incomplete randomization. At that place is no reason to expect that scheduling conflicts affecting group assignment for 2 participants would exist systematically associated with outcomes. The assignment of the concluding five participants to GMT is a greater threat to estimation. Notwithstanding, ancillary analyses indicated that this group was non different from the first six GMT participants on groundwork demographic and neuropsychological exam performance, nor did these two groups differ on baseline outcome measures. In that location were no meaning main effects or interactions involving these two subgroups across event assessments for the main experimental measures. In other words, there was no show that the last five, non-randomized participants responded differentially to GMT. A marginally significant Group × Session interaction for rule violations on the Belfry test suggested, if annihilation, an attenuated outcome in the last five GMT participants, which would work against the significant handling furnishings for this variable.

The main inclusion benchmark for this study was cocky- and clinician-reported executive functioning deficits associated with a significant encephalon injury affecting the frontal lobes or their interconnected systems. In theory, executive performance intervention should target psychological processes rather than etiology; an effective intervention should employ across etiologies, especially in patients with stable lesions, as in this report. Nonetheless, the heterogeneity of this sample, although representative of a true clinical population with executive impairment, may accept influenced the results, particularly considering the modest sample size. Similarly, the incomplete counterbalancing of diagnosis beyond groups cannot exist ruled out equally contributing to the effects. We are therefore currently conducting trials of GMT on more homogeneous patient samples. We did not have access to high-quality imaging information that would be helpful in characterizing patients and identifying lesion profiles associated with different treatment outcomes. We attempted to capture the executive functioning deficits of patients with frontal lobe damage using a battery of laboratory tests and issue questionnaires. The power to detect modify specific to an intervention decreases as the dimensionality of outcome measures increase. Thus the strongest effects of GMT were observed on the SART, a specific measure of sustained attending. There were no effects on multifactorial questionnaires. There was an issue on an ecologically valid laboratory exam, the Hotel exam, but this was difficult to interpret as it did not adapt to expectation. Futurity research will require more advanced outcome measures to assess generalization to real-life in larger, more homogenous, randomized samples.

Disharmonize of Involvement Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absenteeism of whatever commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential disharmonize of involvement.

Acknowledgments

We thank the patients who participated in this enquiry for volunteering their time and effort. Sam Katerji is thanked for participant testing and coordination. Additional technical assistance was provided by Lisa Strifler, Namita Kumar, and Allison Mackey. This enquiry was supported past grants from the JSF McDonnell Foundation (JSMF220020082), the Ontario Heart and Stroke Foundation Centre for Stroke Recovery, and the National Institute of Child Wellness and Human being Development to Brian Levine (HD42385-01).

References

Broadbent, D. E., Cooper, P. F., FitzGerald, P., and Parkes, K. R. (1982). The cognitive failures questionnaire (CFQ) and its correlates. Br. J. Clin. Psychol. 21(Pt 1), one–16.

Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text

Burgess, P. Westward., Alderman, N., Evans, J., Emslie H., and Wilson, B. A. (1998). The ecological validity of tests of executive function. J. Int. Neuropsychol. Soc. 4, 547–558.

Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text

Burgess, P. West., Alderman, N., Evans, J. J., Wilson, B. A., and Emslie, H. (1996). "The dysexecutive questionnaire," in Behavioral Assessment of the Dysexecutive Syndrome, eds B. A.Wilson, N. Alderman, P. West. Burgess, H. Emslie, and J. J. Evans (Bury St. Edmunds: Thames Valley Test Company).

Cicerone, K. D., Dahlberg, C., Kalmar, K., Langenbahn, D. M., Malec, J. F., Bergquist, T. F., Felicetti, T., Giacino, J. T., Harley, J. P., Harrington, D. East., Herzog, J., Kneipp, South., Laatsch, L., and Morse, P. A. (2000). Evidence-based cognitive rehabilitation: recommendations for clinical practice. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 81, 1596–1615.

Pubmed Abstruse | Pubmed Full Text

Cicerone, One thousand. D., Dahlberg, C., Malec, J. F., Langenbahn, D. M., Felicetti, T., Kneipp, S., Ellmo, W., Kalmar, Thou., Giacino, J. T., Harley, J. P., Laatsch, 50., Morse, P. A., and Catanese, J. (2005). Evidence-based cognitive rehabilitation: updated review of the literature from 1998 through 2002. Curvation. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 86, 1681–1692. [Encounter comment].

Pubmed Abstruse | Pubmed Full Text

Cohen, J. D., and Servan-Schreiber, D. (1992). Context, cortex, and dopamine: a connectionist approach to behavior and biology in schizophrenia. Psychol. Bull. 99, 45–77.

Corbetta, M., and Shulman, Grand. 50. (2002). Control of goal-directed and stimulus-driven attention in the encephalon. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. three, 201–215.

Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text

Delis, D. C., Kaplan, Eastward., and Kramer, J. H. (2001). Delis-Kaplan Executive Operation System (D-KEFS). San Antonio: The Psychological Corporation.

Duncan, J., Emslie, H., Williams, P., Johnson, R., and Freer, C. (1996). Intelligence and the frontal lobe: the organization of goal-directed behavior. Cogn. Psychol. 30, 257–303.

Pubmed Abstruse | Pubmed Full Text

Fish, J., Evans, J. J., Nimmo, M., Martin, E., Kersel, D., Bateman, A., Wilson, B. A., and Manly, T. (2007). Rehabilitation of executive dysfunction following encephalon injury: "content-free" cueing improves everyday prospective memory operation. Neuropsychologia 45, 1318–1330.

Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text

Jaeggi, S. Chiliad., Buschkuehl, 1000., Jonides, J., and Perrig, West. J. (2008). Improving fluid intelligence with training on working retentivity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 105, 6829–6833.

Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text

Kabat-Zinn, J. (1990). Full Catastrophe Living. New York: Dell Publishing.

Levine, B., Dawson, D., Boutet, I., Schwartz, One thousand. Fifty., and Stuss, D. T. (2000a). Cess of strategic self-regulation in traumatic brain injury: its relationship to injury severity and psychosocial outcome. Neuropsychology 14, 491–500.

CrossRef Full Text

Levine, B., Robertson, I. H., Clare, L., Carter, M., Hong, J., Wilson, B. A., Duncan, J., and Stuss, D. T. (2000b). Rehabilitation of executive operation: an experimental-clinical validation of goal management training. J. Int. Neuropsychol. Soc. 6, 299–312.

CrossRef Full Text

Levine, B., and Downey-Lamb, M. (2002). "Blueprint and evaluation of intervention experiments," in Neuropsychological Interventions: Emerging Treatment and Management Models for Neuropsychological Impairments, ed. P. J. Eslinger (New York: Guilford Publications), 80–104.

Levine, B., Stuss, D. T., Milberg, Due west. P., Alexander, M. P., Schwartz, M., and Macdonald, R. (1998). The furnishings of focal and diffuse encephalon damage on strategy application: show from focal lesions, traumatic brain injury, and normal crumbling. J. Int. Neuropsychol. Soc. four, 247–264.

Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text

Levine, B., Stuss, D. T., Winocur, G., Binns, G. A., Fahy, L., Mandic, Thou., Bridges, K., and Robertson, I. H. (2007). Cognitive rehabilitation in the elderly: effects on strategic behavior in relation to goal management. J. Int. Neuropsychol. Soc. 13, 143–152.

Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text

Levine, B., Turner, 1000. R., and Stuss, D. T. (2008). "Rehabilitation of frontal lobe functions," in Cognitive Neurorehabilitation, Evidence and Applications, eds D. T. Stuss, G. Winocur, and I. H. Robertson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 464–486.

Manly, T., Hawkins, Grand., Evans, J., Woldt, Thousand., and Robertson, I. H. (2002). Rehabilitation of executive role: facilitation of effective goal management on complex tasks using periodic auditory alerts. Neuropsychologia 40, 271–281.

Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text

Mayberg, H. S. (1997). Limbic-cortical dysregulation: a proposed model of depression. J. Neuropsychiatry Clin. Neurosci. 9, 471–481.

Pubmed Abstruse | Pubmed Full Text

McDonald, Due west. I., and Ron, Chiliad. A. (1999). Multiple sclerosis: the disease and its manifestations. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond., B, Biol. Sci. 354, 1615–1622.

Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text

McIntosh, A. R., Kovacevic, N., and Itier, R. J. (2008). Increased brain signal variability accompanies lower behavioral variability in development. PLoS Comput. Biol. 4, e1000106. doi: x.1371/periodical.pcbi.1000106

Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text

Neary, D., Snowden, J. South., Gustafson, L., Passant, U., Stuss, D. T., Blackness, S., Freedman, M., Kertesz, A., Robert, P. H., Albert, M., Boone, K., Miller, B. L., Cummings, J., and Benson, D. F. (1998). Frontotemporal lobar degeneration: a consensus on clinical diagnostic criteria. Neurology 51, 1546–1554.

Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text

Norman, D. A., and Shallice, T. (1986). "Attention to action: willed and automatic control of behaviour," in Consciousness and Self-regulation, eds G. E. Schwartz and D. Shapiro (New York: Plenum Press), i–18.

O'Connell, R. K., Dockree, P. Yard., Bellgrove, M. A., Turin, A., Ward, S., Foxe, J. J., and Robertson, I. H. (2009). Two types of activity fault: electrophysiological bear witness for separable inhibitory and sustained attention neural mechanisms producing error on go/no-get tasks. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 21, 93–104.

O'Connor, C., Robertson, I. H., and Levine, B. (in press). The prosthetics of vigilant attention: random cuing cuts processing demands. Neuropsychology.

Persson, J., and Reuter-Lorenz, P. A. (2008). Gaining control: training executive function and far transfer of the power to resolve interference. Psychol. Sci. xix, 881–888.

Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text

Raz, N. (2000). "Aging of the brain and its impact on cognitive performance: integration of structural and functional findings," in The handbook of Aging and Knowledge, second Edn, eds F. I. K. Craik and T. A. Salthouse (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assembly, Inc.), ane–90.

Robertson, I. H. (1996). Goal Direction Grooming: A Clinical Transmission. Cambridge: PsyConsult.

Robertson, I. H., and Garavan, H. (2000). "Vigilant attention," in The New Cerebral Neurosciences, ed. M. Gazzaniga (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), 563–578.

Robertson, I. H., Manly, T., Andrade, J., Baddeley, B. T., and Yiend, J. (1997). "Oops!": operation correlates of everyday attentional failures in traumatic brain injured and normal subjects. Neuropsychologia 35, 747–758.

Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text

Rohling, M. L., Faust, M. E., Beverly, B., and Demakis, G. (2009). Effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation post-obit acquired brain injury: a meta-analytic re-examination of Cicerone et al.'s (2000, 2005) systematic reviews. Neuropsychology 23, twenty–39.

Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text

Schweizer, T. A., Levine, B., Rewilak, D., O'Connor, C., Turner, G., Alexander, Thousand. P., Cusimano, Yard., Manly, T., Robertson, I. H., and Stuss, D. T. (2008). Rehabilitation of executive operation after focal damage to the cerebellum. Neurorehabil. Neural. Repair 22, 72–77.

Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text

Segal, Z. V., Williams, J. 1000. G., and Teasdale, J. D. (2002). Mindfulness-based Cognitive Therapy for Depression: A New Arroyo to Preventing Relapse xiv. New York, NY: Guilford Press, 351.

Shallice, T. (1982). Specific impairments in planning. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond., B 298, 199–209.

Stuss, D. T., and Alexander, M. P. (2007). Is there a dysexecutive syndrome? Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond., B, Biol. Sci. 362, 901–915.

Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text

Stuss, D. T., Potato, One thousand. J., Binns, Grand. A., and Alexander, M. P. (2003). Staying on the job: the frontal lobes control private performance variability. Encephalon 126(Pt eleven), 2363–2380.

Pubmed Abstruse | Pubmed Full Text

Stuss, D. T., Pogue, J., Buckle, Fifty., and Bondar, J. (1994). Label of stability of performance in patients with traumatic brain injury: variability and consistency on reaction fourth dimension tests. Neuropsychology 8, 316–324.

CrossRef Total Text

Stuss, D. T., Stethem, L. L., Hugenholtz, H., Picton, T., Pivik, J., and Richard, M. T. (1989). Reaction time subsequently traumatic encephalon injury: fatigue, divided and focused attention, and consistency of performance. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatr. 52, 742–748.

Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text

Swartz, R. H., Stuss, D. T., Gao, F., and Black, S. E. (2008). Independent cerebral furnishings of atrophy and diffuse subcortical and thalamico-cortical cerebrovascular disease in dementia. Stroke 39, 822–830.

Pubmed Abstruse | Pubmed Total Text | CrossRef Full Text

Tranel, D., Anderson, S. W., and Benton, A. (1994). "Evolution of the concept of "executive function" and its relationship to the frontal lobes," in Handbook of Neuropsychology, eds F. Boller and J. Grafman (Amsterdam: Elsevier), 125–148.

van Hooren, Due south. A., Valentijn, S. A., Bosma, H., Ponds, R. W., van Boxtel, M. P., Levine, B., Robertson, I. H., and Jolles, J. (2007). Result of a structured grade involving goal management training in older adults: a randomised controlled trial. Patient Educ. Couns. 65, 205–213.

Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text

Source: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnhum.2011.00009/full

Posted by: yatescoultan.blogspot.com

Share this post