Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-x5cpj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-01T12:35:14.288Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effect of Cognitive Stimulation Therapy on Cognition and Social Independence in People With Dementia at the North Norfolk Memory Service

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2024

Oluwaseun Olaluwoye*
Affiliation:
Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust, Norwich, United Kingdom
Gemma Ridel
Affiliation:
Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust, Norwich, United Kingdom
Bethan Jones
Affiliation:
Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust, Norwich, United Kingdom
Abosede Ighomereho
Affiliation:
Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust, Norwich, United Kingdom
*
*Presenting author.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

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.
Aims

Cognitive stimulation therapy (CST) is a psychosocial treatment for people with dementia. It is an evidence-based treatment which shows improvement in cognition, well-being and quality of life of people living with dementia. CST is recognised as one of the interventions which is cost-effective.

The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guideline recommends that people with mild to moderate dementia should be given opportunities to take part in CST. The CST sessions done in North Norfolk are weekly sessions which span 90 minutes. A group of between 8–10 people attend a 14-week CST treatment course.

The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of the CST on cognition and social independence of patients with dementia in North Norfolk.

Methods

Patients diagnosed with mild to moderate dementia at the memory service were referred for CST sessions. A trained professional assessed the patients to determine their eligibility for CST. The assessment included: assessing motivation to join a group therapy, administration of the short-version of the Addenbrooke Cognitive Examination questionnaire (MINI-ACE) to assess cognitive functions and the administration of Engagement and Independence in Dementia Questionnaire (EIDQ) which measures the social independence of the patients. A higher score on both questionnaires indicates better cognitive function and social independence, respectively.

The CST sessions spanned from February 2023 to May 2023. The patients were re-assessed after the 14-week sessions of CST for their MINI-ACE and EIDQ scores. A qualitative questionnaire was administered for feedback about the sessions.

Data were obtained from patients' clinical record following approval from the research and service evaluation team of the Trust.

Results

Nine patients completed the 14-week CST sessions. The mean age of the patients was 82.9 ± 4.8. 66.7% were male and 33.3% were female. 77.8% were on memory medication and 22.2% were not on memory medication. 44.4%, 33.3%, 11.1% and 11.1% were diagnosed with dementia in Alzheimer's Disease; Mixed Alzheimer's-Vascular Dementia, Lewy Body Dementia and Frontotemporal Dementia, respectively.

The same proportion of patients (44.5%) had both increased and decreased MINI-ACE score after CST while 11% had no changes in MINI-ACE score. Majority (66.7%) had increased EIDQ score after CST, 22.2% had decreased EIDQ score and 11.1% had no changes.

Conclusion

The CST sessions done in North Norfolk showed more positive effect on social independence than cognition in people with dementia.

Type
4 Service Evaluation
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal College of Psychiatrists

Footnotes

Abstracts were reviewed by the RCPsych Academic Faculty rather than by the standard BJPsych Open peer review process and should not be quoted as peer-reviewed by BJPsych Open in any subsequent publication.

Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.