Current cognitive testing methods in the elderly rely on clinical assessments, which are time consuming, costly, and require highly trained staff (Kueider, Parisi, Gross, & Rebok, 2012). We are developing a serious game with the goal of improving the ergonomics of cognition assessment. Instead of pencil and paper, or a computer, we are using touch-based tablets in order to provide a highly mobile and usable form of cognitive assessment. We are currently conducting usability studies on elderly adults in different healthcare environments to evaluate the technology. This paper presents work on customizing the game for use by elderly adults in a hospital emergency department (ED) and it will discuss some of the results obtained thus far, focusing on the usability of the game for this clinical population. In addition to usability results we will also report on the validity of the game in terms of how well it agrees with existing methods of cognitive assessment that are used in the ED.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AngueraJ. A., BoccanfusoJ., RintoulJ. L., Al-HashimiO., FarajiF., JanowichJ., GazzaleyA. (2013). Video game training enhances cognitive control in older adults. Nature, 501(7465), 97–101.
2.
BaruaP., BilderR., SmallA., & SharmaT. (2005). Standardisation Study of Cogtest. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 31(2).
3.
FolsteinM. F., FolsteinS. E., & McHughP. R. (1975). #x201C;Mini-mental state.”Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12(3), 189–198. doi:10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6
4.
GamberiniL., AlcanizM., BarresiG., FabregatM., IbanezF., & ProntuL. (2006). Cognition, technology and games for the elderly: An introduction to ELDERGAMES Project. PsychNology Journal, 4(3), 285–308.
5.
GamberiniL., MartinoF., SeragliaB., SpagnolliA., FabregatM., IbanezF., AndresJ. M. (2009). Eldergames project: An innovative mixed reality table-top solution to preserve cognitive functions in elderly people. In 2009 2nd Conference on Human System Interactions (pp. 164–169). IEEE. doi:10.1109/HSI.2009.5090973
InouyeS. K., van DyckC. H., AlessiC. A., BalkinS., SiegalA. P., & HorwitzR. I. (1990). Clarifying confusion: the confusion assessment method. A new method for detection of delirium. Annals of Internal Medicine, 113(12), 941–8.
8.
JacovaC, KerteszA., BlairM., FiskJ. D., & FeldmanH. H. (2007). Neuropsychological testing and assessment for dementia. Alzheimer's & Dementia</img>: The Journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 3(4), 299–317.
9.
KellandD. Z., & LewisR. F. (1996). The Digit Vigilance Test: reliability, validity, and sensitivity to diazepam. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology</img>: The Official Journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists, 11(4), 339–44.
10.
KueiderA. M., ParisiJ. M., GrossA. L., & RebokG. W. (2012). Computerized cognitive training with older adults: a systematic review. PloS One, 7(7), e40588. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0040588
11.
LudwigC., BorellaE., TettamantiM., & de RibaupierreA. (2010). Adult age differences in the Color Stroop Test: a comparison between an Item-by-item and a Blocked version. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 51(2), 135–42.
McCuskerJ., ColeM. G., DendukuriN., & BelzileE. (2004). The delirium index, a measure of the severity of delirium: new findings on reliability, validity, and responsiveness. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 52(10), 1744–9.
NasreddineZ. S., PhillipsN. A., BédirianV., CharbonneauS., WhiteheadV., CollinI., ChertkowH. (2005). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 53(4), 695–9.
16.
OlsenR. K., PangelinanM. M., BogulskiC., ChakravartyM. M., LukG., GradyC. L., & BialystokE. (2015). The effect of lifelong bilingualism on regional grey and white matter volume. Brain Research. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2015.02.034
17.
RobbinsT. W., JamesM., OwenA. M., SahakianB. J., McInnesL., & RabbittP. (n.d.). Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB): a factor analytic study of a large sample of normal elderly volunteers. Dementia (Basel, Switzerland), 5(5), 266–81.
18.
SesslerC. N., GosnellM. S., GrapM. J., BrophyG. M., O'nealP.V., KeaneK. A., ElswickR. K. (2002). The Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale: validity and reliability in adult intensive care unit patients. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, 166(10), 1338–44. doi:10.1164/rccm.2107138
19.
TongT., & ChignellM. (2014). Developing Serious Games For Cognitive Assessment: Aligning Game Parameters with Variations in Capability. In Proceedings of the Second International Symposium of Chinese CHI on -Chinese CHI '14 (pp. 70–79). New York, New York: ACM Press.
20.
TongT., PatelA., NoorZ., & ChignellM. (2014). A Serious Game for Cognitive Assessment of Aging Adults. In 43rd Annual Scientific and Educational Meeting Canadian Association on Gerontology 2014: Landscapes of Aging, Critical Issues, Emerging Possibilities. Niagara Falls, Ontario.
21.
YechiamE., GoodnightJ., BatesJ. E., BusemeyerJ. R., DodgeK. A., PettitG. S., & NewmanJ. P. (2006). A formal cognitive model of the go/no-go discrimination task: evaluation and implications. Psychological Assessment, 18(3), 239–49.
