Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 10, 2026
Measurements of Motor Function and Other Clinical Outcome Parameters in Ambulant Children with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy
Published on: January 12, 2019
Multimodal personalised executive function intervention (E-Fit) for school-aged children with complex congenital
Alenka S Schmid1,2, Melanie Ehrler3,2,4, Silvia A Bunge5
1Child Development Center, University Children's Hospital Zurich, Zürich, Switzerland alenka.schmid@kispi.uzh.ch.
Objective:
To explore the feasibility of a novel multimodal executive function intervention in school-aged children with complex congenital heart disease (cCHD).
Design:
Single-centre, single-blinded, randomised-controlled 8-week multimodal personalised executive function intervention (E-Fit) study. Outcomes were measured throughout the intervention, post-intervention (T1) and at 4-month follow-up (T2).
Setting:
Tertiary care centre between May 2022 and May 2024.
Participants:
Children 10 to 12 years (M=11.0, SD=0.9) with cCHD without a genetic diagnosis with infant open-heart surgery and reported difficulties (T-scores ≥60) on any of the summary scales of the parent- or teacher-reported Behavior Rating Inventory for Executive Function (BRIEF).
Interventions:
Children with cCHD were randomly assigned to one of two groups: the intervention or the control group. The 8-week intervention was multimodal including three modalities: (1) computerised executive function (EF) training 3×20 min/week with CogniFit; (2) a weekly, remote standardised 1:1 individual EF strategy coaching; (3) analogue games played at convenience. The control group completed activity logs.
Feasibility Measures:
Acceptability: Acceptance and Feasibility Scale (AFS) and coach-rated engagement during coaching sessions. Demand: Number of completed computerised training, strategy coaching and analogue game sessions.
Implementation:
E-Fit Fidelity Measurement System, assessing adherence to core components. Practicality: Retention rate. Integration: AFS integration items. Exploratory efficacy: BRIEF, neuropsychological EF testing and psychosocial variables at baseline, post-intervention (8 weeks) and at 4-month follow-up.
Results:
We recruited 42 participants (Nfemale=20). Acceptability: The intervention was acceptable, with moderate observed engagement. Demand: median number of computerised training sessions completed was 16 of 24 sessions (67%, (IQR; 6 to 19)), all children attended all scheduled coaching sessions, analogue games were played in total a median of 9 times (IQR 4 to 14).
Implementation:
Coaching sessions could be implemented by the coaches as intended. Practicality: Overall retention rate was 90%. Integration: E-Fit was well integrable into the home setting. Exploratory efficacy favoured the intervention group with improvements in the parent-rated Behavioral Regulation Index of the BRIEF (adjusted Hedge's (gA1) = -0.408 to -0.903) and in social responsiveness (gA1 = -0.427 to -0.521) at T1 and at T2.
Conclusions:
E-Fit is a feasible intervention suggesting EF and social responsiveness improvements in children with cCHD. Motivational strategies to improve adherence to computerised training should be refined before a full-scale efficacy trial.
Trial Registration Number:
NCT05198583.