Background: Compensatory Cognitive Training (CCT) is a group-based manualized cognitive training intervention developed in the United States (1). CCT targets post-concussive and cognitive (learning and memory, prospective memory, attention and concentration, cognitive flexibility and problem-solving, planning and goal-setting) symptom management following traumatic brain injury (TBI), and has previously been delivered to veterans with mild TBI (2). As part of an ongoing randomized controlled trial aimed at exploring the effect of a combined cognitive and vocational intervention, CCT was adapted to a Norwegian setting.
Aims: Assess satisfaction with CCT in a civilian TBI-sample and compare satisfaction ratings to a previous pilot study (1).
Methods: Thirty-eight individuals with mild-to-moderate TBI in the South-Eastern region of Norway received the CCT-intervention over a period of 10 weeks. Satisfaction with the intervention was assessed with the CCT Feedback Form consisting of 9 items rated on a 5-point scale with regard to perceived helpfulness (1 = not helpful, 5 = extremely helpful). Participants also provided qualitative feedback on what topic or strategy they found most and least helpful, suggestions on how to improve the program, and whether they would recommend the program to others with similar problems. Descriptive statistics were applied.
Results: Average age was 40 years (range 25-58) and years of education was 16 (range 12-22), with 53% being male. The participants rated information about TBI and post concussive symptoms, strategies for fatigue, prospective memory, attention and concentration, and learning and memory above 3.5 (i.e. towards very helpful), and strategies for headache, problem solving and cognitive flexibility, and information about additional services available above 3 (i.e. moderately helpful). Information regarding TBI and post concussive symptoms received the highest mean rating (4.1), while sleep strategies received the lowest mean rating (2.9). The total mean score of all categories was 3.5. With the exception of sleep strategies, these results are comparable to Twamleys pilot study (1). In the qualitative feedback section, the participants reported the most helpful strategies to be those concerning memory, fatigue, attention and concentration. With regard to the least helpful strategies, strategies related to organization, problem-solving and cognitive flexibility were most frequently mentioned. The most frequent suggestion on how to improve CCT was to increase program duration. Finally, 87% of the participants responded that they would recommend CCT to others with similar problems (8% = “I don’t know”, 5% = “No”).
Conclusion: The participants rated most topics in the CCT-intervention CCT as helpful. Based on the feedback, minor adjustments concerning duration and sleep strategies could be considered. As the main study is ongoing, the results are preliminary, and final results will be presented at the congress.

1.	Twamley et al. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2014;51(1):59-70.
2.	Storzbach et al. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2017;32(1):16-24.

Participants’ satisfaction with Compensatory Cognitive Training (CCT) as part of a vocational rehabilitation program