Face-to-face vs. Telerehabilitation language and cognitive training in patients with multi-domain amnestic mild cognitive impairment.

ABSTRACT

The recent coronavirus emergency raised the question of whether telerehabilitation could be as effective as conventional face-to-face intervention. The aim of the present study was to compared language and cognitive training delivered to patients from a distance, through telecommunication systems, for the same intervention conducted on a face-to-face mode in patients with multi domain amnestic MCI (md-aMCI). To this end, 30 patients diagnosed with md-aMCI took part in the present study. The participants divided into two groups; one group received conventional face-to-face training and the other group received Telerehabilitation training. Both groups received language training using paper and pencil tasks and cognitive training using the Rehacom software. The training lasted 15 weeks and was delivered twice a week, for 60 minutes per session. The conventional face-to-face mode had a significant impact on cognitive (delayed and working memory, processing speed, executive function, and attention) and language domains (naming, word recognition, and semantic fluency). The telerehabilitation method had a beneficial impact on delayed memory, naming, and semantic fluency. The results of our study provide evidence that both telerehabilitation and face-to-face language and cognitive training seem to have a positive impact in patients with md-aMCI, with face-to-face training improving more domains than telerehabilitation.