English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Objectives: To determine the effectiveness of computer-assisted cognitive rehabilitation and compare the patterns of cognitive function recovery occurring in both traumatic brain injury (TBI) and stroke. Methods: A total of 62 patients were finally enrolled, consisting of 30 with TBI and 32 with stroke. The patients received 30 sessions of computer-assisted cognitive rehabilitation (Comcog) five times per week. Each session lasted for 30 min. Before and immediately after cognitive rehabilitation, all patients were evaluated by computerized neuropsychological test (CNT), Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), and modified Barthel index (MBI). Results: We analyzed the differences between pre- and post-cognitive rehabilitation in each TBI and stroke group. Significant differences were observed in MMSE, MBI, and some CNT contents, including digit span forward, verbal learning, verbal learning delayed recall, visual span forward, visual span backward, visual learning, trail making test A and B, and intelligence quotient (IQ) in the TBI group (p &lt; 0.05). In the stroke group, in addition to significant differences that appeared in the TBI group, additional significant differences in the digit span backward, visual learning delayed recall, auditory continuous performance test (CPT), visual CPT, and card sorting test. We compared the difference values at pre- and post-cognitive rehabilitation for cognitive recovery between the TBI and stroke groups. All contents, except the digital span forward, visual learning, word-color test, and MMSE, had greater mean values in the stroke group; and thus, statistically significant higher values were observed in the visual span forward and card sorting test (p &lt; 0.05). Conclusion: Most evaluation results showed improvement and the evaluation between the TBI and stroke groups also showed significant differences in cognitive functions in addition to more CNT contents, which significantly change in the stroke group. The stroke group showed a high difference value in most CNT contents. Therefore, those with stroke in the focal brain region tend to have better cognitive function recovery after a computer-assisted cognitive rehabilitation than those with TBI, which could cause diffuse brain damage and post-injury inflammation.

The Effectiveness of Computer-Assisted Cognitive Rehabilitation and the Degree of Recovery in Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury and Stroke