The ANCDS also reviewed 21 studies addressing the effectiveness of external aids for memory compensation, using the key questions noted above.5 The most common type of external aid was a written memory notebook or daily planner (9 studies), while other studies evaluated various electronic devices. The authors

concluded that treatment to establish the use of external aids for memory compensation might be considered a Practice Guideline as a means of improving day-to-day functioning for people with brain injury. Finally, the ANCDS 6 conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis www.selleckchem.com/products/gsk-j4-hcl.html of 15 studies addressing interventions for executive functions after TBI. Ten of the studies (including 5 RCTs) utilized

metacognitive strategy instructions (eg, for self-monitoring and control of cognitive processes). These studies supported metacognitive strategy training to improve problem solving for personally relevant activities, based on significant effect sizes for activity and participation outcomes compared with control treatments. The review led to the recommendation of a practice standard for the use of metacognitive strategy training with young to middle-age adults with TBI in chronic stages of disability for difficulties with problem solving, planning, and organization. Two reviews were based directly on the task force’s earlier systematic reviews. One of these evaluated the methodologic click here quality of 53 comparative effectiveness

studies (32 RCTs and 21 observational studies) involving exclusively or primarily Palmatine participants with TBI.7 There were several high-quality studies that supported the effectiveness of interventions for attention, communication skills, executive functioning, and comprehensive-holistic rehabilitation after TBI, including improvements on participation outcomes. This analysis also noted the value of non-RCTs in providing evidence for the effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation for people with TBI. Rohling et al8 conducted a meta-analytic reexamination of the task force’s prior systematic reviews. They found a small significant overall treatment effect that was directly attributable to cognitive rehabilitation, after controlling for improvements in nontreatment control groups. The meta-analyis revealed sufficient evidence for the effectiveness of attention training after TBI, language treatment for aphasia, and visuospatial treatment for neglect syndromes after stroke. Treatment effects were moderated by the targeted cognitive domain, time since injury, etiology, and age. Differing conclusions between this meta-analysis and the systematic reviews may reflect differences in methodology.