DESIGN: This study was a two-arm within-participants trial with 4- and 12-wk follow-ups. Allocation ratio was 1:1, and pretraining and posttraining measurements were included. A total number of 25 healthy older adults were enrolled (mean = 63.32, SD = 4.44). Participants were randomly allocated into two conditions: (a) prospective memory training: participants underwent a multicomponent prospective memory training, and (b) control: participants were not contacted during the training phase. After the training phase was finished, participants crossed over to undergo the condition they did not experience before. The differences between pretraining and posttraining measures of prospective memory, activities of daily living, negative mood (depression), and anxiety were assessed. All changes in the measurements were analyzed using general linear method. This trial is registered at https://www.isrctn.com (#ISRCTN57600070).
RESULTS: Multicomponent prospective memory training program was significantly effective on both subjective and objective prospective memory performances among healthy older adults. Moreover, the training had significant positive effects on activities of daily living (independence) among participants. In addition, negative mood and anxiety levels were reduced after the training was finished.
CONCLUSIONS: This multicomponent prospective memory training improved prospective memory performance and activities of daily living and reduce negative mood (depression) and anxiety levels among healthy older adults.
DESIGN: We downloaded the CONSORT 2010 Statement and all endorsed and unofficial extensions reported on the CONSORT and EQUATOR websites. We extracted all statements on the selection, design, delivery or interpretation of data from comparison groups in clinical trials. We discussed preliminary findings during the Cochrane Rehabilitation Methodology Meeting in Kobe, then further by email before finalizing results.
RESULTS: We identified 24 standards reported across the CONSORT 2010 Statement and ten extensions. Overall, these standards address many, but not all, issues related to reporting of comparison groups in rehabilitation trials.
CONCLUSION: We recommend that additional standards be created for the selection of types of comparisons, choices around reporting of "usual care", reporting of intended "mechanisms of control", and reporting a rationale for the hypothesized superiority of one intervention over another when superiority trial design are used. Rehabilitation research would benefit from development of a specific checklist and guidelines to help researchers make best use of existing extensions.
METHODS: This multinational cross-sectional survey was conducted in rehabilitation facilities in Malaysia, Indonesia, and Thailand. Community-dwelling adults with traumatic or nontraumatic spinal cord injury participating in the International Spinal Cord Injury Community Survey from 2017 to 2018 were enrolled. Data regarding bladder management/care, presence of bladder dysfunction, urinary tract infection, and quality of life score were extracted from the International Spinal Cord Injury Community Survey questionnaire. The impact of bladder care and urinary complications on quality of life was determined using univariable and multivariable regression analysis.
RESULTS: Questionnaires from 770 adults were recruited for analysis. After adjusting for all demographic and spinal cord injury-related data, secondary conditions, as well as activity and participation factors, urinary tract infection was an independent negative predictive factor of quality of life score ( P = 0.007, unstandardized coefficients = -4.563, multivariable linear regression analysis, enter method).
CONCLUSIONS: Among bladder care and urinary complication factors, urinary tract infection is the only factor negatively impacting quality of life. These results address the importance of proper bladder management and urinary tract infection prevention in persons with spinal cord injury to improve their quality of life.