"Despite the small sample size, it was clear that retrieval practice (RP) was superior to other learning strategies in this group of memory-impaired individuals with severe TBI," explained Dr. Sumowski.

Researchers studied ten patients with severe TBI and memory impairment (<5^th percentile) to see whether RP improved memory after short (30 min) and long (1 week) delays. During RP, also described as testing effect, patients are quizzed shortly after information to be learned is presented. RP was compared with two other learning strategies--massed restudy (MR), which consists of repeated restudy (ie, cramming) and spaced restudy (SR), for which individuals restudy information at intervals (ie, distributed learning).

Results showed that recall was better with RP than with MR or SR. Moreover, RP was more effective for memory after short delay, and was the only strategy that supported memory after long delay. This robust effect indicates that RP would improve memory in this group in real-life settings. "If these individuals learn to incorporate this compensatory strategy into their daily routines, they can improve their memory," Dr. Sumowski noted. "For example, rather than re-reading an article several times, it would be more effective if they quizzed themselves periodically, eg, after each paragraph or page."

Future randomized controlled trials of RP training are needed to confirm the benefits of RP in larger numbers of patients with TBI, according to Dr. DeLuca, VP of Research and Training. Another challenge is convincing patients that this strategy is effective. "Most people, with and without TBI, favor MR for learning and memory," said Dr. DeLuca. "We will need to educate individuals with TBI about the benefits of RP."

Story Source:

Materials provided by Kessler Foundation. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Journal Reference:

1. James F. Sumowski, Julia Coyne, Amanda Cohen, John DeLuca. Retrieval Practice Improves Memory in Survivors of Severe Traumatic Brain Injury. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 2014; 95 (2): 397 DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2013.10.021