目的:评估,在进行更大的审判之前,研究过程的可行性,以确定基于职业的战略培训的有效性,以产生对受过训练的现实世界行为的变化,并确定是否将培训效果转移到现实世界影响的衡量标准,包括参与日常生活,可以实现。
方法:部分随机对照试验,干预前和干预后评估由评估者掩盖治疗组。
方法:测试发生在一个研究机构,在参与者家中进行干预。
方法:患有慢性创伤性脑损伤(TBI)的人(N=13),实验组为7岁(平均年龄,42.6y;TBI后的平均时间,9.8岁;4名男性)和6名控制臂(平均年龄,40.5y;TBI后的平均时间,10.8岁;3名男子),在干预阶段之前和之后立即进行评估。
方法:基于职业的策略培训,对日常职业表现的认知取向(CO-OP)的改编版本,每周提供两次1小时的会议,为期10周。
方法:加拿大职业绩效评估,执行不力问卷,梅奥-波特兰适应性清单-4参与指数,以及运动和过程技能评估。
结果:所有参与者都可以接受研究过程(测试和干预)。发现远转移的证据,因为实验组在绩效和对未训练目标的绩效评分的满意度方面显着高于对照组(P<0.05),并报告参与水平增加(P<0.01)。
结论:研究结果必须谨慎解释,因为样本很小,并且与未治疗对照进行比较。然而,他们认为培训是可行的,需要进行更大规模的试验.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate, before undertaking a larger
trial, feasibility of the
study processes to determine the effectiveness of occupation-based strategy training for producing changes on trained real-world behaviors, and to determine whether far transfer of training effects to measures of real-world impact, including participation in everyday life, could be achieved.
METHODS: Partially randomized controlled
trial with pre- and postintervention assessments done by assessors masked to the treatment arm.
METHODS: Testing occurred at a research institute, interventions at participants\' homes.
METHODS: People (N=13) with chronic traumatic brain injury (TBI), 7 in the experimental group (mean age, 42.6y; mean time post-TBI, 9.8y; 4 men) and 6 in the control arm (mean age, 40.5y; mean time post-TBI, 10.8y; 3 men), were assessed immediately before and after the intervention phase.
METHODS: Occupation-based strategy training, an adapted version of the Cognitive Orientation to daily Occupational Performance (CO-OP), was provided in two 1-hour sessions per week for 10 weeks.
METHODS: Canadian Occupational Performance Measure, Dysexecutive Questionnaire, Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory-4 Participation Index, and Assessment of Motor and Process Skills.
RESULTS: The
study processes (testing and intervention) were acceptable to all participants. Evidence of far transfer was found as the experimental group improved significantly more than the control group on performance and satisfaction with performance ratings on untrained goals (P<.05), and reported increased levels of participation (P<.01).
CONCLUSIONS: Findings must be interpreted with caution since the sample is small and comparisons are made with a no-treatment control. Nevertheless, they suggest that the training is feasible and a larger
trial warranted.