Ten‐Year Effects of the Advanced Cognitive Training for Independent and Vital Elderly Cognitive Training Trial on Cognition and Everyday Functioning in Older Adults

<jats:sec> <jats:title>Objectives</jats:title> <jats:p>To determine the effects of cognitive training on cognitive abilities and everyday function over 10 years.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Design</jats:title> <jats:p> Ten‐year follow‐up of a randomized, controlled single‐blind trial (Advanced Cognitive Training for Independent and Vital Elderly ( <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">ACTIVE</jats:styled-content> )) with three intervention groups and a no‐contact control group. </jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Setting</jats:title> <jats:p>Six U.S. cities.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Participants</jats:title> <jats:p>A volunteer sample of 2,832 persons (mean baseline age 73.6; 26% African American) living independently.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Intervention</jats:title> <jats:p>Ten training sessions for memory, reasoning, or speed of processing; four sessions of booster training 11 and 35 months after initial training.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Measurements</jats:title> <jats:p>Objectively measured cognitive abilities and self‐reported and performance‐based measures of everyday function.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Results</jats:title> <jats:p> Participants in each intervention group reported less difficulty with instrumental activities of daily living ( <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">IADL</jats:styled-content> s) (memory: effect size = 0.48, 99% confidence interval ( <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">CI</jats:styled-content> ) = 0.12–0.84; reasoning: effect size = 0.38, 99% <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">CI</jats:styled-content>  = 0.02–0.74; speed of processing: effect size = 0.36, 99% <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">CI</jats:styled-content>  = 0.01–0.72). At a mean age of 82, approximately 60% of trained participants, versus 50% of controls ( <jats:italic>P </jats:italic> < .05), were at or above their baseline level of self‐reported <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">IADL</jats:styled-content> function at 10 years. The reasoning and speed‐of‐processing interventions maintained their effects on their targeted cognitive abilities at 10 years (reasoning: effect size = 0.23, 99% <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">CI</jats:styled-content>  = 0.09–0.38; speed of processing: effect size = 0.66, 99% <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">CI</jats:styled-content>  = 0.43–0.88). Memory training effects were no longer maintained for memory performance. Booster training produced additional and durable improvement for the reasoning intervention for reasoning performance (effect size = 0.21, 99% <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">CI</jats:styled-content>  = 0.01–0.41) and the speed‐of‐processing intervention for speed‐of‐processing performance (effect size = 0.62, 99% <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">CI</jats:styled-content>  = 0.31–0.93). </jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Conclusion</jats:title> <jats:p> Each Advanced Cognitive Training for Independent and Vital Elderly cognitive intervention resulted in less decline in self‐reported <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">IADL</jats:styled-content> compared with the control group. Reasoning and speed, but not memory, training resulted in improved targeted cognitive abilities for 10 years. </jats:p> </jats:sec>