Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T17:13:11.611Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

AS02-02 - Individualization of Cognitive Training and Psychosocial Rehabilitation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 April 2020

A. Mucci
Affiliation:
Psychiatry, University of Naples SUN, Naples, Italy
G. Piegari
Affiliation:
Psychiatry, University of Naples SUN, Naples, Italy
S. Galderisi
Affiliation:
Psychiatry, University of Naples SUN, Naples, Italy

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Cognitive remediation with adjunctive psychiatric rehabilitation is associated with greater improvement in functional outcome than standalone treatment approaches (1–3). Moving from these observations our group designed an individualized rehabilitation program (SSANIT, 4) including a computerized cognitive training (CCT) and social skills training (SST), which showed promising results. However, greater understanding of the differential impact of various methods and the factors involved in the generalization of treatment effects to community functioning are among crucial areas for research.

Recently we compared the effects of CCT and SST on several indices of outcome in psychotic patients. Both treatment methods were highly individualized to improve transfer of acquired skills to real life settings.

Fifty-eight patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups: CCT or SST. Changes in cognitive, psychopathological and psychosocial indices after 6 and 12 months were compared between the two groups.

An improvement of real-life functioning indices was observed in both groups, while cognitive functions improved only after CCT.

Our findings suggest that the individualization of treatments favor generalization of effects to real-life settings. CCT has a greater impact on cognitive deficits.

Advantages and limits of the integration of these interventions will be discussed.

Type
Abstract
Copyright
Copyright © European Psychiatric Association 2012

References

McGurk, , et al.Am J Psychiatry 2007; 164: 1791180210.1176/appi.ajp.2007.07060906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurzban, , et al.Curr Psychiatry Rep 2010; 12: 34535510.1007/s11920-010-0129-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wykes, T., et al.Am J Psychiatry 2011; 168: 47248510.1176/appi.ajp.2010.10060855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galderisi, , et al.Eur Arch Psychiaty Clin Neurosci 2009; 260: 30531510.1007/s00406-009-0078-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.