Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorSargénius, Hanna Lovise
dc.contributor.authorAndersson, Stein
dc.contributor.authorHaugen, Ingvild
dc.contributor.authorHypher, Ruth Elizabeth
dc.contributor.authorBrandt, Anne Elisabeth
dc.contributor.authorFinnanger, Torun Gangaune
dc.contributor.authorRø, Torstein Baade
dc.contributor.authorRisnes, Kari
dc.contributor.authorStubberud, Jan Egil
dc.date.accessioned2023-10-13T09:48:45Z
dc.date.available2023-10-13T09:48:45Z
dc.date.created2023-06-30T13:11:39Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.identifier.issn1664-2295
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/3096347
dc.description.abstractBackground: Goal management training (GMT), a metacognitive rehabilitation method that has been demonstrated to improve executive function (EF) in adults with acquired brain injury (ABI), could potentially be effective for children in the chronic phase of ABI. In a previously published randomised controlled trial (RCT), the efficacy of a paediatric adaptation of GMT (pGMT) compared to a psychoeducative control intervention (paediatric Brain Health Workshop, pBHW) was investigated. Comparable improvements in EF in both groups were found at 6-month follow-up. However, a specific effect of pGMT could not be conclusively proven. The present study reports 2-year follow-up data (T4; T1: baseline, T2: post-intervention, T3: 6-month follow-up, and T4: 2-year follow-up) from this original RCT. Methods: A total of 38 children and adolescents and also their parents completed questionnaires tapping into daily life EF. Explorative analyses were conducted comparing the 2-year follow-up data (T4) with the baseline (T1) and 6-month follow-up data (T3) for T4-participants in the two intervention groups (pGMT; n = 21, pBHW; n = 17), and we also assessed T4-participants vs. non-responders (n = 38) in the RCT. Primary outcome measures were the Behavioural Regulation Index (BRI) and the Metacognition Index (MI) derived from the Behaviour Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF) parent report. Results: No difference between intervention groups was found (BRI, F = 2.25, p = 0.143, MI, F = 1.6, p = 0.213), and no time*group interaction (BRI, F = 0.07, p = 0.976, MI, F = 0.137, p = 0.937) could be seen at the 2-year follow-up. Nevertheless, both pGMT and the pBHW groups improved daily EF as measured by parental reports over time from the baseline to T4 (p = 0.034). T4 participants and non-responders shared similar baseline characteristics. Conclusion: Our results extend the findings from the 6-month follow-up previously published. Both pGMT and pBHW groups sustained their improvements in daily life EFs from the baseline, but additional effectiveness of pGMT relative to pBHW was not found.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherFrontiers Media S. A.en_US
dc.rightsNavngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleCognitive rehabilitation in paediatric acquired brain injury—A 2-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trialen_US
dc.title.alternativeCognitive rehabilitation in paediatric acquired brain injury—A 2-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trialen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.source.volume14en_US
dc.source.journalFrontiers in Neurologyen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.3389/fneur.2023.1173480
dc.identifier.cristin2159881
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal