Neurophysiological indices of the transfer of cognitive training gains to untrained tasks.

Targeted training of working memory (WM) may improve performance and modulate brain function in untrained cognitive modalities. Demanding cognitive training protocols that do not target WM may also improve performance on untrained cognitive tests, but the delineation between transfer effects that are unique to WM training and effects that are shared among different cognitive training modalities has not been well-established. To address this, we examined the effects of twenty sessions of either WM training (visual n-back task with letter stimuli) or selective attention training (visual search task with letter array stimuli) on brain function during untrained WM and cognitive control tasks. Event-related potentials (ERPs) were obtained at baseline (pretest) and after the training period (posttest) for two untrained tasks - a Spatial 3-back task measuring spatial WM, and a Go/NoGo Flanker task measuring cognitive control. The n-back training group had more pronounced pretest-to-posttest performance improvements on the Spatial 3-back task compared to the search training group. N-back training was also associated with pretest-to-posttest enhancement of N1 amplitude and reduced N2 latency on trials of the task in which where there was a stimulus match, as well as enhancement of a late positive potential (550-750 msec post-stimulus) for all trials of the task. These ERP effects suggest that n-back training resulted in enhancement of attention to spatial locations, earlier onset of conflict monitoring processes, and changes in the engagement of neural activity during the retention interval, respectively. Both groups had faster reaction time on Go trials of the Go/NoGo Flanker task at posttest compared to pretest. Relatively subtle training-related effects were observed for N2 amplitude on this task, in line with the notion that training (particularly n-back training) was associated with improved conflict monitoring. Further, search training resulted in earlier onset of P2 and P3 latency at posttest compared to pretest. Taken together, the ERP findings for both tasks identify specific cognitive processes that are associated with transfer to untrained tasks after distinct forms of cognitive training.

A pilot randomized controlled trial comparing effectiveness of prism glasses, visual search training and standard care in hemianopia.

OBJECTIVE: Pilot trial to compare prism therapy and visual search training, for homonymous hemianopia, to standard care (information only). METHODS: Prospective, multicentre, parallel, single-blind, three-arm RCT across fifteen UK acute stroke units. PARTICIPANTS: Stroke survivors with homonymous hemianopia. INTERVENTIONS: Arm a (Fresnel prisms) for minimum 2 hours, 5 days per week over 6 weeks. Arm b (visual search training) for minimum 30 minutes, 5 days per week over 6 weeks. Arm c (standard care-information only). INCLUSION CRITERIA: Adult stroke survivors (>18 years), stable hemianopia, visual acuity better than 0.5 logMAR, refractive error within ±5 dioptres, ability to read/understand English and provide consent. OUTCOMES: Primary outcomes were change in visual field area from baseline to 26 weeks and calculation of sample size for a definitive trial. Secondary measures included Rivermead Mobility Index, Visual Function Questionnaire 25/10, Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living, Euro Qual, Short Form-12 questionnaires and Radner reading ability. Measures were post-randomization at baseline and 6, 12 and 26 weeks. RANDOMIZATION: Randomization block lists stratified by site and partial/complete hemianopia. BLINDING: Allocations disclosed to patients. Primary outcome assessor blind to treatment allocation. RESULTS: Eighty-seven patients were recruited: 27-Fresnel prisms, 30-visual search training and 30-standard care; 69% male; mean age 69 years (SD 12). At 26 weeks, full results for 24, 24 and 22 patients, respectively, were compared to baseline. Sample size calculation for a definitive trial determined as 269 participants per arm for a 200 degree2 visual field area change at 90% power. Non-significant relative change in area of visual field was 5%, 8% and 3.5%, respectively, for the three groups. Visual Function Questionnaire responses improved significantly from baseline to 26 weeks with visual search training (60 [SD 19] to 68.4 [SD 20]) compared to Fresnel prisms (68.5 [SD 16.4] to 68.2 [18.4]: 7% difference) and standard care (63.7 [SD 19.4] to 59.8 [SD 22.7]: 10% difference), P=.05. Related adverse events were common with Fresnel prisms (69.2%; typically headaches). CONCLUSIONS: No significant change occurred for area of visual field area across arms over follow-up. Visual search training had significant improvement in vision-related quality of life. Prism therapy produced adverse events in 69%. Visual search training results warrant further investigation.