AppReminders - a pilot feasibility randomized controlled trial of a memory aid app for people with acquired brain injury.

Mobile phone reminding apps can be used by people with acquired brain injury (ABI) to compensate for memory impairments. This pilot feasibility trial aimed to establish the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial comparing reminder apps in an ABI community treatment setting. Adults with ABI and memory difficulty who completed the three-week baseline were randomized (n = 29) and allocated to Google Calendar or ApplTree app. Those who attended an intervention session (n = 21) watched a 30-minute video tutorial of the app then completed reminder setting assignments to ensure they could use the app. Guidance was given if needed from a clinician or researcher. Those who passed the app assignments (n = 19) completed a three-week follow up. Recruitment was lower than target (n = 50), retention rate was 65.5%, adherence rate was 73.7%. Qualitative feedback highlighted issues that may impact usability of reminding apps introduced within community brain injury rehabilitation. Feasibility results indicate a full trial would require 72 participants to demonstrate the minimally clinically important efficacy difference between apps, should a difference exist. Most participants (19 of 21) given an app could learn to use it with the short tutorial. Design features implemented in ApplTree have potential to improve the uptake and utility of reminding apps.

Severity of Alzheimer's disease and effect on premorbid measures of intelligence.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the robustness of the National Adult Reading Test (NART), Wechsler Test of Adult Reading (WTAR), Cambridge Contextual Reading Test (CCRT), Spot the Word (STW), and a demographic regression equation in estimating premorbid ability in people with Alzheimer's disease (AD). DESIGN: A cross-sectional multiple measures design. METHOD: Sixty-six probable AD participants were classified into stages of severity according to their Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) score (minimal 24 to 28; mild 14 to 23). Their scores on the NART, WTAR, CCRT, STW and a demographic equation were compared with 32 healthy age matched controls. RESULTS: Significant between-group differences were found for the tests of reading ability (NART, WTAR and CCRT). The mild group made significantly more errors than the control and minimal groups. For the mild group, there was an advantage of putting the NART words into context (CCRT), but this group still made significantly more errors than the control and minimal groups. The NART was compared with the demographic estimate and there was a significant difference for the mild group with the demographic estimate providing a higher estimate. This was not the case for the control or minimal groups. There was no significant difference between the groups on the lexical decision task (STW). CONCLUSION: Reading of irregular words is compromised in AD for those with a MMSE score in the range of 14 to 23. A lexical decision task may provide a more accurate estimate of premorbid intelligence in those with mild AD. Further research is needed to provide evidence of STW's correlation with current ability.