Use of a Robotic Seal as a Therapeutic Tool to Improve Dementia Symptoms: A Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial

作者：Moyle Wendy; Jones Cindy J; Murfield Jenny E; Thalib Lukman; Beattie Elizabeth R A; Shum David K H; O' Dwyer Siobhan T; Mervin M Cindy; Draper Brian M

来源：Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 2017, 18(9): 766-773.

DOI：10.1016/j.jamda.2017.03.018

• Agitation
• BPSD
• engagement
• PARO
• mood state
• older people

Objectives: To test the effects of individual, nonfacilitated sessions with PARO (version 9), when compared against a look-alike plush toy and usual care, on the emotional and behavioral symptoms of dementia for people living in long-term care facilities.
Design: Parallel, 3-group, cluster-randomized controlled trial conducted between June 14, 2014, and May 16, 2015.
Setting: Twenty-eight long-term care facilities operated by 20 care organizations located in South-East Queensland, Australia.
Participants: Four hundred fifteen participants aged >= 60 years, with a documented diagnosis of dementia.
Intervention: Stratified by private/not-for-profit status and randomized using a computer-generated sequence, 9 facilities were randomized to the PARO group (individual, nonfacilitated, 15-minute sessions 3 times per week for 10 weeks); 10 to plush toy (same, but given PARO with robotic features disabled); and 9 to usual care. Treatment allocation was masked to assessors.
Measurements: Primary outcomes were changes in levels of engagement, mood states, and agitation after a 10-week intervention, assessed by coded video observations (baseline, weeks 1, 5, 10, and 15) and Cohen-Mansfield Agitation InventoryeShort Form (baseline, weeks 10 and 15). Analyses followed intention-to-treat, using repeated measures mixed effects models. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12614000508673).
Results: Video data showed that participants in the PARO group were more verbally [3.61, 95% confidence interval (CI): 6.40-0.81, P = .011] and visually engaged (13.06, 95% CI: 17.05-9.06, P < .0001) than participants in plush toy. Both PARO (-09, 95% CI: -0.45 to -5.72, P = .022) and plush toy (-3.58, 95% CI: -1.26 to -5.91, P = .002) had significantly greater reduced neutral affect compared with usual care, whilst PARO was more effective than usual care in improving pleasure (1.12, 95% CI: 1.94-0.29, P = .008). Videos showed that PARO was more effective than usual care in improving agitation (3.33, 95% CI: 5.79-0.86, P = .008). When measured using the CMAI-SF, there was no difference between groups.
Conclusions: Although more effective than usual care in improving mood states and agitation, PARO was only more effective than a plush toy in encouraging engagement.

• 出版日期2017-9-1