Practice-Based Evidence: the process for ATC · 2. Remember what people tell you (21) 3. Remember things you need to do (21) 4. Phone numbers/addresses (15) 5. Birthdays & anniversaries

Practice-Based Evidence: the process for ATC

rehabilitation

Don MacLennan, MA/CCC!Chief, Speech Pathology Section!

Minneapolis VA Health Care System

I have no financial relationships to disclose

• To understand current evidence-based practice for ATC

• Identify principles of experience-dependent plasticity

Objectives

• Illustrate how application of principles of experience-! dependent plasticity inform instructional methods for! providing ATC strategies to people with cognitive ! impairments

• Discuss practice-based evidence as a strategy to stay ahead of the evidence

• Apply above information to a case study focusing on ATC

“We no longer find it acceptable to sit people in !front of a computer or workbook in the belief that!

such exercises will result in improved cognitive!and, more importantly, social functioning.”

Evolution of Cognitive Rehabilitation

Wilson & Gracey, 2009

• Collaborative Goal Setting!• Cognitive, emotional, social consequences of brain injury! are interlinked !• Technology is playing a larger part than ever before in! helping people with cognitive deficits compensate for! their problems!• No one model or theory is sufficient to handle all the! complexities of neurorehabilitation

ATC and Rehabilitation Staff

Survey of 81 Rehabilitation Professionals (Hart et al, 2003)

17% used AT personally / 49% used AT clinically

Cost as significant barrier

Lack of confidence in their ability to provide service

Survey of 147 Rehabilitation Professionals (deJoode et al, 2010)

30% used AT personally / 28% used AT clinically

BUT - implementation of AT in clinical practice has been! “delayed or even stalled”

No longer see cost as a primary barrier

Evidence for ATC

“Evidence-based practice guidelines are explicit descriptions of how patients should be evaluated

and treated. The purpose of guidelines is to improve and assure the quality of care by reducing unacceptable variation in its provision”

Evidence-Based Practice!(Golper et al, 2001)

Sohlberg, Kennedy, Avery, Coelho, Turkstra, Ylvisaker & Yorkston.!(2007) Evidence-based practice for the use of external aids as a memory compensation technique. Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology, 15, pp. xv-li.

de Joode, van Heugten, Verhey & van Boxtel. (2010) Efficacy of assistive technology for patients with cognitive deficits: a systematic review. Clinical Rehabilitation, 24, 701-714.

Literature Search: 2009-present

The Evidence: What the Research Offers

Sohlberg et al, 2007 21 research studies 277 participants

Who• majority of subjects adult males• most in post-acute phase of injury

• varied etiologies• varied treatment settings

What Device

• written planner/memory notebook (9)• hand-held PDAs (4)

• voice organizers/recorders (3)

• pager (3)• mobile phone (1)• navigational aid (1)

Outcomes• laboratory-based measures (4)

• structured tasks simulating demands of everyday memory (1)

• retrospective questionnaires of everyday memory performance (6)

• performance on memory tasks cued by the aid (11)

• ratings of preference, satisfaction, or perception of ! benefit• frequency of use (5)• anecdotal reports of effectiveness (2)

Practice Guideline

de Joode et al, 2010 28 papers/25 studies 423 participants

Who• majority of subjects adult males• most in post-acute phase of injury

• varied etiologies• varied treatment settings

What Device

• hand-held PDAs (6)

• voice recorders (4)

• NeuroPage (4)

• mobile phone (4)

• combination of devices (3)

Outcomes• everyday tasks (14)

• laboratory-based measures (6)

• performance on tests (3)

• navigation (2)

• interpersonal communication (1)

Practice Guideline

ATC 2009-2012

ATC: 2009-2012

Teasdale et al, 2011• Class I • NeuroPage • 99 caregivers • Reduced caregiver strain as measured!

by Modified Caregiver Strain Index

McDonald et al, 2011

• Class I • Google Calendar! with SMS texts

• 12 adults! with ABI

• Significant improvement in prospective ! memory tasks with SMS texts

Dowds et al, 2011• Class II • Paper diary vs!

2 types PDAs• 36 adults! with TBI

• Significant improvement in prospective ! memory tasks with PDA

Lemoncello et al, 2011

• Class I •Television Assisted ! Prompting vs! ‘typical strategies’

• 23 adults! with ABI • Significant improvement in prospective !

memory tasks with TAP!!

Svoboda et al, 2012

• Class II• Class II • Smartphone or ! PDA vs paper ! diary

• 10 adults! with ABI

• Smartphone/PDA associated with ! significant improvement over paper diary!

33 Studies

504 people

All studies report treatment effect

Gaps in the Evidence

Gaps: Unresearched ATC Devices

Smart Pens

Data Watches

iTouch

iPad

iPhone

Droid Phones

PEAT

There’s an App for That!!!

Tasks Schedules

Routines

Checklists/Outlines

Learning

Sustained Attention

Goals

Gaps: Unresearched Populations

mTBI

Other compensatory strategies that might be applied include using mnemonic strategies...external memory

aids such as a diary, daily planner and/or handheld PDF or mobile phone to assist with structuring the

day and remembering things; using a tape recorder to tape meetings or telephone conversations to allow for review of their contents...However there has

been very limited controlled evaluation of interventions of this nature.

Ponsford, 2012

Gaps Between What the Evidence Demonstrates

and! What Consumers Want

What Studies Show What People with TBI Want(Hart, Buchhofer, & Vaccaro, 2004)

Prospective Memory Prospective Memory

Retrospective Memory

Learning

Organization

What Studies Show What People with TBI Want(Hart, Buchhofer, & Vaccaro, 2004)

1. Take medications

2. Remember appointments

3. Laboratory tasks ! (call clinic at a specific time)! (remember an artificial schedule)

4. Remember therapy goals

5. Make entries into memory logs

6. Completing real-life tasks

7. Decreasing verbose! conversation

1. Track money spent (21)

2. Remember what people tell you (21)

3. Remember things you need to do (21)

4. Phone numbers/addresses (15)

5. Birthdays & anniversaries (14)

6. Remember shopping items (12)

7. Learn brand new things like ! new procedures at work (13)

Use ATC for more than prospective memory?

Use ATC devices not yet evaluated in EBP literature?

Use app-driven ATC devices that are well-suited for customization of strategies to meet individual needs?

Use ATC with mild TBI population?

VA is Well Ahead of the Evidence

How many of you:

Use ATC?

Practice-Based Evidence (Horn & Gassaway, 2007)

Embraces elements of clinical trials

3. Select clinically relevant interventions to compare

1. Include a diverse population of study participants

2. Recruit from heterogeneous practice settings

4. Collect data on a broad range of health outcomes

Quality Improvement!Program

PIE ModelPlan!

Implement!Evaluate

Sohlberg & Turkstra, 2011

Practice-based Evidence

Clinician’s use of real-time feedback to develop, guide, and evaluate clinical services

Practice-Based Evidence

Practice-based evidence provides evidence !that will help generate new knowledge and !bridge the gap between recommended and!

improved care

RCTs are important to confirm whether a new tx!causes an effect - they are unlikely to discover

combinations of interventions or practices that are effective and efficient in routine care

Ongoing, iterative, assessment with functional, !ecologically valid measures

Instructional methodologies that enhance acquisition, implementation, and maintenance of effective strategies

Uses a variety of outcomes measures to assess the effectiveness of treatment

Features of Practice-Based Evidence for ATC

Ongoing, Functional Assessment

Group Prospective Memory Challenge

Cognitive Skills Group - group of 5

During the week• give everyone else in the group a prospective memory task

(6 with me)

• at least a 24 hour interval between giving task & task completion• can only give one task per day• task must be quick, easy; not involve money; and cause no ! embarrassment

Everyone in group: gives 5 tasks and receives 5 tasks

Predict performance & compare with actual performance

Identify “Real-World” Performance TargetsAppointments: 100%

Prospective Tasks: 70-100%

More Than Prospective Memory

Strategy Outcome

Trial 1 iTouch Tasks App Predicted: 90%Actual: 100%

Retrospective: 0%

Participant 1: Snooze Alarms

Trial 1

Strategy Outcome

Trial 2

Written Notes

i Touch / Pocket Informant app! 1 alarm

Real World Target - 90%

Predicted: 80%Actual: 30%


Trial 3i Touch / Pocket Informant app!

2 alarms

Multiple AlarmsParticipant 1: Snooze Alarms

Trial 1

Strategy Outcome

Trial 2

Written Notes





Trial 3i Touch / Pocket Informant app! 2 alarms


Trial 4 i Touch / “Due” app! continuous 1 minute snooze

1-minute !snooze !alarm

Participant 1: Snooze Alarms

Trial 1

Strategy Outcome

Trial 2

Written Notes





Trial 3 i Touch / Pocket Informant app! 2 alarms


Trial 4 i Touch / “Due” app! continuous 1 minute snooze


Participant 2: Organization

Trial 1

Strategy Outcome

iPhone 4S task list!with alarms


Predicted: 70%

Actual: 30%

Trial 2iPhone 4S task list !with alarms

Predicted: 50%

Actual: 40%

Trial 3 • iPhone 4S task list! with alarms

Tasks Given Assig DueMr Yellow: Tell me where you had basic 5/4 5/6 lunchMs Purple: Where did you buy your parrot?

5/3 5/6 0830

Mr Pink: Give me a high 5 at cognitive skills 5/2 5/4 cog Mr Green: Show me the book you’re 5/5 5/7 Town Mr Red: Who is Nebraska’s quarterback? 5/6 5/8 lunch

Tasks Received Assig DueMr Yellow:Ms Purple: Mr Pink:Mr Green:Mr Red:

• Paper & pencil ! organizational grid

Tasks Given Assigned DueMr Yellow: Tell me where you had basic training 5/4 5/6 lunch

Ms Purple: Where did you buy your parrot? 5/3 5/6 0830

Mr Pink: Give me a high 5 at cognitive skills group 5/2 5/4 cog skills

Mr Green: Show me the book you’re reading 0830 5/5 5/7 Town Hall

Mr Red: Who is Nebraska’s quarterback? 10:00 5/6 5/8 lunch

Tasks Received Assigned DueMr Yellow:

Ms Purple:

Mr Pink:

Mr Green:

Mr Red:

Paper & Pencil Organizer


Trial 1

Strategy Outcome



Predicted: 70%

Actual: 30%


Predicted: 50%

Actual: 40%

Trial 3 • iPhone 4S task list! with alarms• Paper & pencil ! organizational grid


Trial 4 • iPhone 4S task list!• Outliner app for iPhone

Outliner + iPhone Tasks


Trial 1

Strategy Outcome



Predicted: 70%

Actual: 30%


Predicted: 50%

Actual: 40%

Trial 3 • iPhone 4S task list! with alarms• Paper & pencil ! organizational grid


Trial 4 • iPhone 4S task list!• Outliner app for iPhone


Actual: 30%

Actual: 40%

Actual: 100%

Group Retrospective Memory Challenge

Spend the majority of our time thinking about the future !(Giambra, 2000)

Problems with memory represent most frequent cognitive!complaint after mod-severe brain injury (Jamora, Young, & Ruff, 2012)

Emphasis on prospective memory in rehabilitation

Close relationship between future thought & retrospective memory

Similar neural activity is involved for both future thinking &! ability to recall past experiences (Addis et al, 2007; Szpunar, 2010)

Brain-injured patients with poor episodic memory also show!difficulties with episodic future thinking (Hassabis & McGuire, 2007; !Klein et al, 2002)


Friday

What I Did Who I was With Conversational!Topics

Retrospective Memory Assessment


12 Staff

7-Day Total

What I Did!(Routine Tasks) Who I was With

Conversational!Topics

36!(10) 35 29

Retrospective memory spanned previous six days


7-Day Total

What I Did!(Routine Tasks)

Who I was With Conversational!Topics

6 !(4)

10 14

Mr Red

Baseline

Retrospective memory spanned previous two days



Use journaling strategy to enhance retrospective memory

Repeat Retrospective Memory Assessment

Journaling as Retrospective Memory Treatment

Journal Review - distributed rehearsal

Each morning and evening review previous 3 days’ entries!“imagine yourself in the situations you recorded”

Mon Tues Weds ThurEntries!

12:00 & 9:00pmEntries!

12:00 & 9:00 pmEntries!

12:00 & 9:00 pmEntries!

12:00 & 9:00 pm

Review7am & 9pm!!

Mon!

Review 7am & 9pm!!

Mon - Tues

Review 7am & 9pm!!

Mon-Tues-Weds

Each entry is reviewed 6 times over a 3 day period

Journaling as Retrospective Memory Assessment

7-Day Total

What I Did Who I was WithConversational!

Topics

12 items!6 routine

31 26

Mr Green

Post-Journaling Strategy

Retrospective memory spanned previous 4 days

Instructional Methodology !& Experience-Dependent!

Neuroplasticity

What Do We Do? !(Gonzalez-Rothi, 2001)

Our goal as therapists is to facilitate the “reconstruction of behavioral functioning after injury or disease through rehabilitation.”

Premise:All behaviors, thoughts, emotions, and perceptual experience!arise from the brain

If Rehabilitation Changes Behavior,!It Changes the Brain!

(Gonzalez-Rothi, 2001)

Rehabilitation is potent - it can change the brain

Plasticity: the ability of the nervous system to change structurally

Hebb (1949): Learning stems from changes in neural connections! at the level of the synapse

- Can learn across the lifespan

10 Principles of Experience-Dependent Plasticity!(Kleim & Jones, 2008)

1. Use it or Lose it: Failure to drive a specific brain function can lead to functional degradation

2. Use it & Improve it:

3. Specificity

4. Repetition Matters

5. Intensity Matters

Training that drives a specific brain function can! lead to an enhancement of that function

The nature of the training experience dictates the nature of the plasticity

Induction of plasticity requires repetition

Induction of plasticity requires sufficient training !intensity

10 Principles of Experience-Dependent Plasticity!(Kleim & Jones, 2008)

6. Time Matters: Different forms of plasticity occur at different times during training

7. Salience Matters:

8. Age Matters

9. Transference

10. Interference

The training experience must be sufficiently salient to produce plasticity

Training-induced plasticity occurs more readily !in younger brains

Plasticity in response to one training experience can enhance the acquisition of similar behaviors

Plasticity in response to one experience can interfere with the acquisition of others

Application of Experience-Dependent Plasticity

DysphagiaRobbins JR, Butler SG, Daniels SK, Gross RD et al. (2008)!Swallowing and Dysphagia Rehabilitation: Translating!Principles of Neural Plasticity into Clinically Oriented Evidence.!JSHR, 51, S276 - S300

AphasiaRaymer AM, Beeson P, Holland A, Kendall D et al. (2008)!Translational Research in Aphasia: From Neuroscience to!Neurorehabilitation.!JSHR, 51, S259 - S300

VoiceRamig L & Fox C. (2009) LSVT Global Certification

Sohlberg !& Turkstra!

2011!!

Guilford!Press

Principles of Neuroplasticity: !Application to Brain Injury Rehabilitation!

(Sohlberg & Turkstra, 2011)

Rehabilitation Planning Rehabilitation Instruction!& Practice

1. Specificity 6. Use it or lose it

2. Interference 7. Use it and improve it

3. Salience matters 8. Repetition matters

4. Time matters 9. Intensity matters

5. Age matters 10. Transference



Rehabilitation Planning

1. Specificity During acquisition training, make stimuli & contexts as!similar to the target as possible

Specificity Treatment targets are as similar as!possible to real world targets

Group Prospective Memory Challenge: receive and give tasks to peers as well as staff

provide tasks that mirror real world expectations!!

- daughter in school - ask to sign and return form ! similar to a permission slip!

! - for person returning to college - bring the book!

you are reading!

receive tasks outside of clinic sessions

Discussion:!How can you enhance

generalization and maintenance of strategies by making treatment

targets as similar as possible to real world targets?




2. Interference During initial acquisition training, be sure that training!does not address multiple, salient targets simultaneously

Interference During initial acquisition training!be sure that training does not address!multiple salient targets simultaneously2 similar strategies!

for retrospective memory

Episodic!Memory

Semantic Memory!Conversational!

Content

iDo!Senior

Momento

Discussion: How might one strategy interfere

with another strategy?!How would that affect treatment

planning?




3. Salience matters Use target tasks and behaviors that are relevant & meaningful to the user

Salience!Matters

Use target tasks and behaviors that !are relevant and meaningful to the user

Ask the question: If this strategy works, what will!be different in your life?

Goals Group: Collaborative Goal Setting

Goals Barriers Treatment

Good parent for my daughter

memory!

can’t remember what ! daughter tells me !

(‘iDo’ app)!!

can’t remember if I’ve! done her morning !

routine (‘It’s Done’ app)

Discussion: How do you identify goals that are both functional and meaningful to

the person?




4. Time matters

5. Age matters

Don’t assume opportunity for meaningful change !ends after the period of spontaneous recovery

Whereas younger brains may have a greater ability to substitute function, they have fewer established pathways!to support learned behaviors

Time Matters

Age Matters

Neither time post-onset from injury!nor age is an exclusionary factor!

in ATC

Discussion: • Oldest person worked with?!• Longest time post-onset?



Rehabilitation Instruction & Practice

6. Use it or! lose it

Gains require maintenance over time or they may!reverse. Consider long-term maintenance schedules

Use it or !lose it

Develop a plan for maintenance

1. Address attitudinal barriers (Baldwin, Powell, & Lorenc, 2011)

Emotional barriers

Demotivating factors

Beliefs about memory

“Not in my nature”

2. Transitional video (Ylvisaker & Feeney, 1998)

1. Address attitudinal barriers

• awareness, self-concept, & adjustment

• facilitate family support

3. Extra practice for fragile strategies• use passes to home, family report to ID fragile strategies

4. Questionnaire

Use it or !lose it

Develop a plan for maintenance Questionnaire Strategy Often Sometimes Never

Pocket Informant

Momento + Facetime

SmartPen

iDo

It’s Done

Break Time

Comments:!!!!!!

2 months

5 months

8 months

12 months




7. Use it and! improve it

Focus on specific, functional targets

Use it and!improve it

The more a skill or strategy is used, the more effective it becomes

The more a strategy supports personally meaningful activities,

the more it will be used

Goal Setting

Motivational Interviewing (Rollnick, Miller, & Butler, 2008)

Ask: where the person wants to go and get to ! know him or her

Inform: the person about options and see what! makes sense to them

Listen: to and respect what the person wants ! to do and offer help accordingly

Truly Collaborative Goal Setting




8. Repetition matters Provide high amounts of practice

9. Intensity mattersProvide intense practice (massed practice) during!initial target acquisition

Massed Practice

1. Select “Due” App

2. Press “+” for new task

4. Select box labelled ! “X minutes later”

5. Set date and time for alarm

6. Press “Add”

3. Type in task

Distributed Practice

Wait 1 minute Correct response

Wait 2 minutes Correct response


Wait 8 minutes Incorrect response



Learn the task

Repetition matters

Intensity matters

People require high amounts of practice,!especially as they are acquiring a skill!

or strategy

Speed Drills

Threshold of speed of entry for adherence to a strategy

Performance on tests of attention is predictive for ! functional use of strategies (Evans et al, 2003)

Goal is to train to mastery, automaticity

Distributed Practice Outside of Clinic

Speed Drills Ms. Purple Threshold: 2 minutes

Medical follow-up appointment

• Rochester CBOC - not your usual clinic

• Dr Miles - 1st floor Medicine Clinic

• Bring medication list

• Ask question: “Do I need a sleep study?”

• Arrange for daughter to be picked up after school

Ms Purple’s Time - 37 seconds

Distributed Practice !Outside of Clinic

Retrospective Memory Challenge

Group Prospective Memory Challenge

Discussion:!How can we arrange sufficient

practice to strengthen a person’s use of strategies?




10. Transference Actively promote generalization to similar !treatment targets

Transference Actively promote generalization !to similar treatment targets

iDo app for remembering important conversational content

iDo!Senior

Employed first in Psychology Direct cues to use the strategy

When independent, and self-directed,! began employing strategy with other! therapies for continuity in programming

Encouraged to use on passes to home

Outcomes !Measures

Satisfaction: QUESTQuebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology

1 2 3 4 5

Not satisfied at all

Not very satisfied

More or less satisfied

Quite !satisfied

Very !satisfied

Device subscale (questions 1-8):(How easy is it to use your assistive device?)

4.7

Services subscale (questions 9-12):(How satisfied are you with professional services!

you received for using your assistive device?)

5.0

Total QUEST score: 4.8

Demers, Weiss-Lambrou, & Ska, 2002

Proficiency:

1. No strategies identified or current strategies! are not appropriate to needs

2. Appropriate strategy identified but has not ! acquired skill to support use of the strategy

3. Uses ATC strategy for functional tasks with! direct cueing (“use ______ strategy”)

4. Uses ATC strategy for functional tasks with! indirect cueing (“how will you remember that”)

5. Independently uses ATC strategy to manage! program activities, personal needs, and ! preferred activities at self-determined ‘real ! world’ frequency targets.

Mastery &!Generalization

Acquisition

Ms. Purple 5 Number & Specificity of Strategies: (Kennedy & Krause, 2011)

Dynamic coaching model promoting self-regulation!& self-efficacy

Number of Strategies

Specificity of Strategies

1. = Very Vague

2. = Vague

3. = Specific

4. = Very Specific

Pre-Tx Post-Tx

0 6

--- 3.5

Ms. Purple:

Ms Purple: Strategies

Impairment StrategySpecificity!

Score

Prospective Mem Pocket Informant 3

Retrospective Episodic

Momento + Facebook 4

Retrospective Semantic Complex

SmartPen 4

Retrospective Semantic !

iDo app 4

Organization (routines)!

and retrospective

It’s Done app 2

Attention Break Time 4

Discussion: How do you measure outcomes for ATC?

References

de Joode E, van Heugten C, Verhey F & van Boxtel M. (2010) Efficacy and usability of assistive technology for patients with cognitive deficits. Clinical Rehabilitation, 24, 701-714.

de Joode E, van Boxtel MPJ, Verhey FR, & van Heugten CM. (2012) Use of!assistive technology in cognitive rehabilitation: Exploratory studies of the!opinions and expectations of healthcare professionals and potential users.!Brain Injury, 26, 1257-1266.

Addis, DR, Wong AT, & Schacter DL. (2007) Remembering the past, imagining!the future: Common and distinct neural substrates during event construction!and elaboration. Neuropsychologia, 45, 1363-1377.

Demers L, Weiss-Lambrou R, & Ska B. (2002) Item analysis of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology. Assistive Technology, 12, 96-105

References

Dowds MM, Lee PH, Sheer JB, O’Neil-Pirozzi TM, Xenopoulos-Oddson A, Goldstein R, Zainea KL & Glenn MB. (2011) Electronic reminding technology following traumatic brain injury: Effects on timely task completion. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 26, 339-347.

Giambra LM. (2000) Daydreaming characteristics across the lifespan: Age differences and seven to twenty year longitudinal changes. In RG Kunzendorf & B Wallace (eds.) Individual differences in conscious experience. Amsterdam,!Netherlands: John Benjamin Publishing Company.

Golper L, Wertz RT, Frattali C, Yorkston K, Myers P, Katz R, Beeson P, Kennedy MRT, Bayles K & Wambaugh J. (2001, September) Evidence-based practice guidelines for the management of neurogenic communication disorders: An introduction. [Online]. Available: http://www.duq.edu/ancds.

Gonzalez-Rothi, L. (2001) Neurophysiologic basis of rehabilitation. Journal of Medical Speech-Langage Pathology, 9, 117-127.

Hart T, Buchofer R, & Vaccaro M. (2004) Portable electronic devices as memory and organizational aids after traumatic brain injury: A consumer survey study. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 19, 351-365.

References

Hart T, O’Neil-Pirozzi T, & Morita C. (2003) Clinician expectations for !portable electronic devices ad cognitive-behavioral orthoses in traumatic !brain injury rehabilitation. Brain Injury, 17, 401-411.

Horn SD & Gassaway J. (2007). Practice-based evidence design for !comparative effectiveness research. Medical Care, 10, supplement S50-57.

Jamora CW, Young A, & Ruff RM. (2012) Comparison of subjective cognitive!complaints with neuropsychological tests in individuals with mild vs more !severe brain injuries. Brain Injury, 26:36-47

Hassabis D & McGuire EA (2009). Deconstructing episodic memory with!construction. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 299-306.

Kleim JA & Jones TA. (2008) Principles of experience-dependent neuroplasticity: Implications for rehabilitation after brain damage. Journal of Speech-Language and Hearing Research, 51, S225-239.

Lemoncello R, Sohlberg MM, Fickas S & Prideaux J. (2011) A randomised controlled crossover trial evaluating Television Assisted Prompting (TAP) for adults with acquired brain injury. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 21, 825-846.

ReferencesKennedy MRT & Krause M. (2011) Self-regulated learning in a dynamic coaching model for supporting college students with traumatic brain injury: Two case reports. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 26, 212-223.

Klein SB, Loftus J, & Kihlstrom JF. (2002) Memory & temporal experience:!The effects of episodic memory loss on an amnestic patient’s ability to !remember the past and imagine the future. Social Cognition, 20, 353-379.

McDonald A, Haslam C, Yates P, Gurr B, Leeder G & Sayers A (2011). Google Calendar: A new memory aid to compensate for prospective memory deficits following acquired brain injury. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 21, 784-807.

References

Ponsford J. (2012) Treatment of mild traumatic brain injury. In J Vasterling, RA Bryant & TM Keane (eds.). PTSD & Mild Traumatic Brain Injury. New York: Guilford Press.

Ramig L & Fox C. (2009) LSVT Global Training.

Raymer AM, Beeson P, Holland A, Kendall D et al. (2008)Translational Research in Aphasia: From Neuroscience to Neurorehabilitation.!JSHR, 51, S259 - S300

Robbins JR, Butler SG, Daniels SK, Gross RD et al. (2008) Swallowing and Dysphagia Rehabilitation: Translating principles of neural plasticity into clinically oriented evidence. JSHR, 51, S276 - S300

Rollnick S, Miller WR, & Butler CC. (2008) Motivational interviewing in health care. New York: Guilford Press.

References

Sohlberg MM & Turkstra LS. (2011) Optimizing Cognitive Rehabilitation: Effective instructional methods. New York: Guilford Press.

Svoboda E, Richards B, Leach L, & Mertens V. (2012) PDA and smartphone use by individuals with moderate-severe memory impairment: Application of a theory-driven training programme. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 22, 408-427.

Sohlberg MM, Kennedy M, Avery J, Coelho C, Turkstra L, Ylvisaker M & Yorkston, K. (2007) Evidence-based practice for the use of external aids as a memory compensation technique. Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology, 15, 15-51.

Szpunar KK, Watson JM & McDermott KB. (2010). Episodic future thouoght:!An emerging concept. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 142-162.

References

Teasdale TW, Emslie H, Quirk K, Evans J, Fish J & Wilson B. (2009) Alleviation of carer strain during the use of the NeuroPage device by people with acquired brain injury. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry, 80, 781-783.

Wilson BA & Gracey F (2009) Towards a comprehensive model of cognitive!rehabilitation. In BA Wilson, F Gracey, JJ Evans & A Bateman (eds.). Neuropsychological Rehabilitation: Theory, models, therapy and outcome. New York: Cambridge.

References

Documents

Practice-Based Evidence: the process for ATC · 2. Remember what people tell you (21) 3. Remember things you need to do (21) 4. Phone numbers/addresses (15) 5. Birthdays & anniversaries