diferencias entre la neurorrehabilitación presencial y online

Are there differences between face-to-face and online neurorehabilitation? Case Study


459views

The Bolivian company Consultora-Strategia explains the differences between neurorehabilitation in person and online with the example of a girl with low attention span.
,
Consultora-Strategia is a company made up of professionals with more than twenty years of experience in different areas related to psychology. We offer services in two important branches: the area of human resources through our system of Online Psychometrics (Strategia-Solutions) and the Educational area, whose activities are related to our Expert Process of Vocational Guidance and Cognitive Neurorehabilitation.

How did we work before Covid confinement?

The neurorehabilitation processes created by the consultant, allow us to develop and potentialize the cognitive processes in a significant way, so that in most cases of our patients, it has been possible to completely overcome the difficulties in learning.

The use of manipulative didactic material and exercises on slides were the basis of our program before the confinement, they contemplated different levels of difficulty that children and young people had to overcome according to their maturity age and characteristics of cognitive development.

The use of statistically reliable tests together with a pre- and post-test methodology, allow us to have an objective and scientific analysis of the results obtained.

What did we do during the confinement?

Due to the confinement by the COVID-19, our Cognitive Neurorehabilitation area had to stop for three months, fortunately we met NeuronUP, whose platform provides us with a series of didactic games, as well as digital interactive cards and sheets, which can be customized according to our needs and the specific needs of each of our patients. Through this platform we had the opportunity to recreate most of our programs, which allowed us to open the online care system at a national and international level, maintaining the quality of the work done.

Our sessions are carried out through videoconference, the children and young people share their screen and the professional can monitor 100% of the session as if she were in the office, which is why the sessions are carried out with the interaction, motivation and guidance of the therapist, aspects that are fundamental within the process. Likewise, we perform a thorough control of the achievements of each patient through our monitoring tables, to customize each session by increasing or decreasing the level of difficulty and / or time of each exercise according to their performance, so that they remain motivated with each new challenge.

Next, we will describe the specific case of a 10-year-old girl. For reasons of confidentiality and professional ethics, we will not reveal her real name, so from now on we will call her Carla.

Carla’s case

In September 2019, Carla’s mother presented herself to Consultora-Strategy for an evaluation of her daughter, stating that the girl had difficulties in maintaining her concentration and difficulties with math. Thus, a series of tests of cognitive reasoning, learning styles, global capacity of attention, body scheme, visceral perception and neuropsychological development among others were carried out.

Diagnosis

The following diagnosis was reached:

  1. Difficulty in auditory information processing.
  2. Dyscalculia
  3. Low attentional capacity.

It was concluded that the main areas to be stimulated were: attentional capacity, auditory processing, auditory memory, numerical reasoning, visuospatial reasoning and body schema.

Neurorehabilitation: differences between presential and online neurorehabilitation

Work began in September 2019 and had to be stopped at the end of October due to political circumstances in Bolivia, which forced us to stop for almost a month. Work resumed at the end of November until the beginning of March 2020, at which time Covid-19 arrived in Bolivia and was confined. Because of this fact we had to stop for three months, so NeuronUP allowed us to resume Carla’s sessions from June 2020.

From September 2019 to February 2020 we started working on attention span, auditory processing, auditory memory and numerical reasoning. In February we could see that Carla’s cognitive abilities had significantly increased in all the areas that had been stimulated until that moment.  As of June 2020, we continued the stimulation through NeuronUP with 100% online sessions, maintaining our programs and adapting the digital material provided by NeuronUP, to work as it was done in the office, and we also began to stimulate body schema and visuospatial reasoning (areas that had not been stimulated until that moment).

Evaluation

At the end of August an evaluation was carried out to scientifically analyze the progress, the results obtained were very satisfactory.

Global Attention Capacity

diferencias entre la neurorrehabilitación presencial y online

diferencias entre la neurorrehabilitación presencial y online

diferencias entre la neurorrehabilitación presencial y online

September 2019

February 2020

Months of stimulation of this area: NoneMonths of stimulation of this area: Four (4)
Selective attention

Percentile: 60 (10% above average)

Capacity :Medium

Selective attention

Percentile: 99 (49% above average)

Capacity: Very High

Divided attention

Percentage of errors in relation to correct answers:  11,1%

Capacity : Medium Low

Divided attention

Percentage of errors in relation to correct answers: 4%

Capacity: High

Sustained attention

Capacity:Deficit

Sustained attention

Capacity:Very high

 

Auditory information processing

diferencias entre la neurorrehabilitación presencial y online

Septiembre 2019

Febrero 2020

Months of stimulation of this area: NoneMonths of stimulation of this area: Four (4)
AUDIO-VERBAL COMPREHENSION

Decatype: 5  

Capacity: Medium

PHONOLOGICAL FLUENCY

Decatype: 4 (1 standard deviation below average)

Capacity:Medium low

VERBAL MEMORY

Decatype: 3 (2 standard deviation below average)

Capacity : Low

RHYTHM

Decatype: 5

Capacity :Medium

AUDIO-VERBAL COMPREHENSION

Decatype: 8

Capacity : High

PHONOLOGICAL FLUENCY

Decatype: 5

Capacity:Medium

VERBAL MEMORY

Decatype: 7 (2 standard deviation below average)

Capacity :Medium high

RHYTHM

Decatype: 5

Capacity:Medium

diferencias entre la neurorrehabilitación presencial y online

September 2019

August 2020

Months of stimulation of this area: NoneMonths of stimulation of this area: Six and a half (6 ½)
AUDITORY WORKING MEMORY

Quotient: 81

Percentile: 10 (40% below average))

Capacity : Very low

AUDITORY WORKING MEMORY

Quotient: 113

Percentile: 81 (31% below average))

Capacity : High

Numerical reasoning


September 2019

August 2020

Months of stimulation of this area: NoneMonths of stimulation of this area: Six and a half (6 ½)
NUMERICAL REASONING

Quotient: 91

Percentile: 27 (23% below average)

Capacity : Medium low

NUMERICAL REASONING

Quotient: 105

Percentile: 66 (16% below average)

Capacity : Medium High

 

Visospatial Reasoning


September 2019 August 2020
Months of stimulation of this area: NoneMonths of stimulation of this area: Two and a half (2 ½)
Quotient:  92  Quotient:  105  
Percentile: 30 (20% below average)Percentile: 63 (13% below average)
Capacity : Medium lowCapacity : Medium high

 Body schema

BODY SCHEMA (100% online stimulation)
September 2019 July 2020
Months of stimulation of this area: NoneMonths of stimulation of this area: Two (2)
Score: 19Score: 36
Chronological age: 10Chronological age: 10 years 10 months
Mature age: 8Mature age: 12
Difference: 2 years below  chronological age.Difference: 1 year and 2 months above chronological age.

 

Making a comparison of the results of the stimulation, it can be appreciated that the visuospatial reasoning that did not have stimulation in the first stage did not present changes, however, once the cognitive stimulation was started, positive and significant changes were evidenced.

Conclusion of the differences between presential and online neurorehabilitation

Likewise, in Carla’s case, it can be evidenced that our cognitive rehabilitation programs, either through presential stimulation (with manipulative didactic material), or through online stimulation (with digital didactic material provided by NeuronUP), were of great benefit to the girl and no significant differences were observed between presential and online neurorehabilitation.

If you have been interested in this article on the differences between presential and online neurorehabilitation, you may also be interested:

Summary
Diferencias entre la neurorrehabilitación presencial y online
Article Name
Diferencias entre la neurorrehabilitación presencial y online
Description
La empresa Consultora-Strategia explica las diferencias entre la neurorrehabilitación presencial y online con el ejemplo de una niña.
Author
Publisher Name
NeuronUP
Publisher Logo

Leave a Reply

Name *
Email *
Website