Cited by 937Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes

Nonpharmacological therapies in Alzheimer’s disease: a systematic review of efficacy

Open access
Olazarán, Javier, Reisberg, Barry, Clare, Linda, Cruz, Isabel, Peña-Casanova, Jordi, del Ser, Teodoro, Woods, Bob, Beck, Cornelia +14 more·2010·Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Nonpharmacological therapies (NPTs) can improve the quality of life (QoL) of people with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and their carers. The objective of this study was to evaluate the best evidence on the effects of NPTs in AD and related disorders (ADRD) by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis of the entire field. METHODS: Existing reviews and major electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The deadline for study inclusion was September 15, 2008. Intervention categories and outcome domains were predefined by consensus. Two researchers working together detected 1,313 candidate studies of which 179 RCTs belonging to 26 intervention categories were selected. Cognitive deterioration had to be documented in all participants, and degenerative etiology (indicating dementia) had to be present or presumed in at least 80% of the subjects. Evidence tables, meta-analysis and summaries of results were elaborated by the first author and reviewed by author subgroups. Methods for rating level of evidence and grading practice recommendations were adapted from the Oxford Center for Evidence-Based Medicine. RESULTS: Grade A treatment recommendation was achieved for institutionalization delay (multicomponent interventions for the caregiver, CG). Grade B recommendation was reached for the person with dementia (PWD) for: improvement in cognition (cognitive training, cognitive stimulation, multicomponent interventions for the PWD); activities of daily living (ADL) (ADL training, multicomponent interventions for the PWD); behavior (cognitive stimulation, multicomponent interventions for the PWD, behavioral interventions, professional CG training); mood (multicomponent interventions for the PWD); QoL (multicomponent interventions for PWD and CG) and restraint prevention (professional CG training); for the CG, grade B was also reached for: CG mood (CG education, CG support, multicomponent interventions for the CG); CG psychological well-being (cognitive stimulation, multicomponent interventions for the CG); CG QoL (multicomponent interventions for PWD and CG). CONCLUSION: NPTs emerge as a useful, versatile and potentially cost-effective approach to improve outcomes and QoL in ADRD for both the PWD and CG.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1159/000316119

Cites

228 of 228 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 229 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Olazarán, J., Reisberg, B., Clare, L., Cruz, I., Peña-Casanova, J., del Ser, T., Woods, B., Beck, C., Auer, S., Lai, C., Spector, A., Fazio, S., Bond, J., Kivipelto, M., Brodaty, H., Rojo, J. M., Collins, H., Teri, L., Mittelman, M., Orrell, M., Feldman, H. H., & Muñiz, R.
Affiliations
  • NYU Langone Health (US)
  • Bangor University (GB)
  • University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (US)
  • MAS Alzheimerhilfe (AT)
  • Hong Kong Polytechnic University (HK)
  • University College London (GB)
  • Alzheimer's Association (US)
  • Newcastle University (GB)
  • Karolinska Institutet (SE)
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
  • Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (ES)
  • Cochrane (GB)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
Venue
Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders
Publisher
S. Karger AG
Published
2010
Volume
30
Issue
2
Pages
161-178
ISSN
  • 1420-8008 (ISSN-L)
  • 1421-9824
OpenAlex
W2116861306
Cited by
937
References
229
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 41 · 2023: 48 · 2022: 50 · 2021: 51 · 2020: 94 · 2019: 62 · 2018: 76 · 2017: 87 · 2016: 81 · 2015: 61 · 2014: 76 · 2013: 68 · 2012: 65
FWCI
7.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • PolyU Institutional Research Archive (Hong Kong Polytechnic University) (submittedVersion)
  • Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Geriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Keywords
Alzheimer's disease, non-pharmacological treatment, dementia, quality of life, caregivers, cognitive training, cognitive stimulation, multicomponent intervention, activities of daily living, mood, restraint prevention, caregiver education, treatment guidelines
MeSH terms
Activities of Daily Living, Aged, Complementary Therapies, Alzheimer Disease, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Humans, Institutionalization, Quality of Life, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome, Caregivers, Disease Progression, Evidence-Based Medicine, Neurodegenerative Diseases, Learning Curve

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review