Communicative, cognitive, and learning considerations in older adults: an integrative review of the literature
Abstract
Introduction. Stimulation and training strategies for older adults have become an increasing priority in social and healthcare contexts, particularly with respect to their communicative, cognitive, and learning abilities, with an emphasis on cognitive remediation. It is therefore necessary to determine the minimum conditions for intervention in this sphere. Accordingly, the objective is to determine the cognitive, communicative, and learning conditions associated with older adults prior to implementing training and stimulation. Methodology. A qualitative and integrative systematic review was conducted, including 25 articles identified in Dialnet, PubMed, Redalyc, SciELO, ScienceDirect, and WoS, published between 2014 and 2024, addressing communicative, cognitive, and learning aspects in the context of educational or stimulation interventions with older adults, which were subjected to content analysis. Results. Three categories were identified: learning conditions (teaching strategies and methodological adaptation to the profile of older adults by the facilitator), communicative conditions (processing, comprehension, expression, and pragmatic skills), and cognitive-communicative conditions (memory, attention, cognitive functioning). Discussion. The characteristics of older adults are related to functional and cognitive factors necessary for training to be successful. Person-centered intervention principles provide lessons for working with these individuals: individual pace, clear and adapted language, avoidance of infantilization. The role of the professional as an empathetic facilitator with socioemotional and communicative competencies is emphasized. Conclusions. Communicative, cognitive, and learning conditions must be considered holistically before the implementation of training and stimulation interventions in older adults.
References
1. Alvarado-García AM, Salazar-Maya ÁM. Análisis del concepto de envejecimiento. Gerokomos [Internet]. 2014;25(2):57-62. Recuperado a partir de: https://scielo.isciii.es/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1134-928X2014000200002&lng=es.%20doi:%2010.4321/S1134-928X2014000200002
2. Bernhardi RV. El Desafío de envejecer: Una mirada desde la neurociencia. ARS MEDICA Revista de Ciencias Médicas [Internet]. 2019;43(3):3-5. Recuperado a partir de: https://researchers.uss.cl/es/publications/el-desaf%C3%ADo-de-envejecer-una-mirada-desde-la-neurociencia
3. Ferreira D, Molina Y, Machado A, Westman E, Wahlund LO, Nieto A, et al. Cognitive decline is mediated by gray matter changes during middle age. Neurobiol Aging [Internet] 2014;35(5):1086-94. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2013.10.095
4. Harada CN, Natelson-Love MC, Triebel Kl. Normal cognitive aging. Clin Geriatr Med [Internet] 2013;29(4):737-52. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cger.2013.07.002
5.Gutiérrez-Rodríguez J, Guzmán-Gutiérrez G. Definición y prevalencia del deterioro cognitivo leve. Rev Esp Geriatr Gerontol [Internet] 2017;52(1):3-6. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0211-139X(18)30072-6
6. Montoya N, Rodríguez Y. Perfil profesional de los fonoaudiólogos colombianos que trabajan con adultos mayores. Rev Chil Fonoaudiol [Internet] 2018;17:1-11. doi: https://doi.org/10.5354/0719-4692.2018.51640
7. Calatayud E, Gómez-Cabello A, Gómez-Soria I. Análisis del efecto de un programa de estimulación cognitiva en adultos mayores con cognición normal: ensayo clínico aleatorizado. An Sist Sanit Navar [Internet] 2021;44(3):361-72. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.23938/assn.0961
8. Hernández-Díaz J, Paredes-Carbonell JJ, Marín-Torrens R. Cómo diseñar talleres para promover la salud en grupos comunitarios. Aten Primaria [Internet] 2013;46(1):40-7. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aprim.2013.07.006
9. Martín Alonso P. Influencia de la reserva cognitiva en la progresión de deterioro cognitivo leve a demencia por enfermedad de Alzheimer [tesis no publicada]. Valladolid: Universidad de Valladolid; 2021. Recuperado a partir de: https://uvadoc.uva.es/handle/10324/47618
10. Calpa-Pastas AM, Santacruz-Bolaños GA, Álvarez-Bravo M, Zambrano-Guerrero CA, Hernández-Narváez EL, Matabanchoy-Tulcan SM. Promoción de estilos de vida saludables: estrategias y escenarios. Hacia Promoc Salud [Internet] 2019;24(2):139-55. doi: https://doi.org/10.17151/hpsal.2019.24.2.11
11. Salazar-Martínez R, Ibáñez Ávila G. Envejecimiento cognitivo y Fonoaudiología: perspectivas en el quehacer terapéutico desde la evidencia. Ciencia Latina [Internet]. 2023;7(5):7154-80. doi: https://doi.org/10.37811/cl_rcm.v7i5.8295
12. Villalba-Agustín S, Tortajada RE. Estimulación cognitiva: una revisión neuropsicológica. Therapeía [Internet]. 2014;6:73-93. Recuperado a partir de: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=5149523
13. Salazar-Martínez R. Funcionalidad comunicativa: uso del concepto dentro del proceso de envejecimiento. Ciencia Latina [Internet]. 2023;7(1):170-96. doi: https://doi.org/10.37811/cl_rcm.v7i1.4387
14. Findsen B, Formosa M. International perspectives on older adult education. Research, policies and practice. [Internet]. United Kingdom: Springer; 2016. Recuperado a partir de: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/288889775_International_perspectives_on_older_adult_education_Research_policy_and_practice
15. Cohen N, Gómez-Rojas G. Metodología de la investigación, ¿para qué?: La producción de los datos y los diseños. 1st Ed [Internet. Buenos Aires: Teseo; 2019. Recuperado a partir de: https://www.teseopress.com/metodologiadelainvestigacion/
16. García-Perdomo HA. Conceptos fundamentales de las revisiones sistemáticas/metaanálisis. Urol Colomb [Internet]. 2015;24(1):28–34. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.uroco.2015.03.005
17. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. Declaración PRISMA 2020: una guía actualizada para la publicación de revisiones sistemáticas. Rev Esp Cardiol [Internet]. 2021;74(9):790-799. doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.recesp.2021.06.016
18. Canales M, Cottet-Soto P. Investigación social: lenguajes del diseño. 1st Ed [Internet]. Santiago: LOM Ediciones; 2013. Recuperado a partir de: https://bibliotecadigital.uchile.cl/discovery/fulldisplay?vid=56UDC_INST:56UDC_INST&tab=Everything&docid=alma991001270429703936&lang=es&context=L&adaptor=Local%20Search%20Engine
19. Ballesteros S, Kraft E, Santana S, Tziraki C. Maintaining older brain functionality: A targeted review. Neurosci Biobehav Rev [Internet] 2015;55:453-77. doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2015.06.008
20. Bambini V, Tonini E, Ceccato I, Lecce S, Marocchini E, Cavalini E. How to improve social communication in aging: Pragmatic and cognitive interventions. Brain Lang [Internet] 2020;211:2-13. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2020.104864
21. Pigliautile M, Chiesi F, Primi C, Inglese S, Mari D, Simoni D, et al. Validation study of the Italian version of Communication Activities of the Daily Living (CADL 2) as an ecologic cognitive assessment measure in older subjects. Neurol Sci [Internet]. 2019;40:2081-8. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10072-019-03937-w
22. Krein L, Jeon YH, Miller-Amberber A, Fethney J. The assessment of language and communication in dementia: A synthesis of evidence. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry [Internet]. 2019;27(4):363-77. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jagp.2018.11.009
23. Samuelsson C, Adolfsson E, Persson H. The use and characteristics of elderspeak in Swedish geriatric institutions. Clin Linguist Phon [Internet]. 2013;27(8):616–31. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/02699206.2013.773382
24. Lastre-Mesa K. Efectos de un programa de estimulación del lenguaje en adultos mayores con envejecimiento comunicativo normal. Psicología desde el Caribe [Internet]. 2019;36(3):377-99. Recuperado a partir de: http://www.scielo.org.co/pdf/psdc/v36n3/2011-7485-psdc-36-03-377.pdf
25. Opdebeeck C, Martyr A, Clare L. Cognitive reserve and cognitive function in healthy older people: a meta-analysis. Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn [Internet]. 2016;23(1):40–60. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13825585.2015.1041450
26. Condeza AR, Bastías G, Valdivia G, Cheix C, Barrios X, Rojas R, et al. Adultos mayores en Chile: descripción de sus necesidades en comunicación en salud preventiva. Rev Cuadernos.info [Internet]. 2016;38:85-104. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.7764/cdi.38.964
27. Martín FM. Habilidades comunicativas como condicionantes en el uso de las TIC en personas adultas mayores. Int J Educ Res Innov. 2017;8:220–232. Recuperado de https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=6177950
28. Bernhold QS, Giles H. Older Adults’ Age-Related Communication and Routine Dietary Habits. Health Commun [Internet]. 2019;35(12):1556-64. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2019.1652391
29. Salazar M. R, Habilidades socio-comunicativas en base a los interlocutores disponibles en el adulto mayor sano. Revista Chilena de Neuropsicología [Internet]. 2015;10(1):1-4. Recuperado a partir de: https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=179341106001
30. Silagi ML, Rabelo CM, Schochat E, Mansur LL. Healthy aging and compensation of sentence comprehension auditory deficits. Biomed Res Int [Internet]. 2015;2015:640657. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/640657
31. Machado A, Martínez C, Figueroa D, Reyes C. Análisis de la funcionalidad discursivo-pragmática en adultos mayores sanos y con demencia leve. Logos Rev Lingüíst Filosof Lit. 2018;28(1):192-205. https://www.doi.org/10.15443/RL2815
32. Palmer AD, Carder PC, White DL, Saunders G, Woo H, Graville DJ, et al. The impact of communication impairments on the social relationships of older adults: Pathways to psychological well-being. J Speech Lang Hear Res [Internet]. 2019;62(1):1–21. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/2018_jslhr-s-17-0495
33. Mattys S, Scharenborg O. Phoneme Categorization and Discrimination in Younger and Older Adults: A Comparative Analysis of Perceptual, Lexical, and Attentional Factors. Psychol Aging [Internet]. 2014;29(1):150-62. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0035387
34. Travassos A, Bezerra M, Lopes L, Silva V. Social communication and functional independence of the elderly in a community assisted by the family health strategy. Rev CEFAC. 2018;20(3):363-72. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-0216201820313417
35. Torke AM, Callahan CM, Sachs GA, Wocial LD, Helft PR, Monahan PO, et al. Communication quality predicts psychological well-being and satisfaction in family surrogates of hospitalized older adults: An observational study. J Gen Intern Med [Internet]. 2018;33(3):298–304. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11606-017-4222-8
36. González-Martín E, Mendizábal-de la Cruz N, Jimeno-Bulnes N, Sánchez-Gil C. Manifestaciones lingüísticas en personas mayores: el papel de la intervención logopédica en el envejecimiento sano y patológico. Rev Investig Logop [Internet]. 2019;9(1):29–50. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5209/rlog.60770
37. Schnabel EL, Wahl HW, Penger S, Haberstroh J. Communication behavior of cognitively impaired older inpatients. Z Gerontol Geriatr. [Internet]. 2019;52(4):264-72. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00391-019-01623-2
38. Véliz M. Efectos del envejecimiento en los procesos de comprensión y producción del lenguaje. Rev Paideia [Internet]. 2020;54:11-32. Recuperado a partir de: https://revistas.udec.cl/index.php/paideia/article/view/1683
40. Shen MJ, Manna R, Banerjee SC, Nelson CJ, Alexander K, Alici Y, et al. Incorporating shared decision making into communication with older adults with cancer and their caregivers: Development and evaluation of a geriatric shared decision-making communication skills training module. Patient Educ Couns [Internet]. 2020;103(11):2328–34. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2020.04.032
41. Kenis C. Comprehensive geriatric assessment: The Belgian experience of implementation in the care of older adult patients with cancer. Clin J Oncol Nurs. 2019;23(3):332-5. https://www.doi.org/10.1188/19.CJON.332-335
42. Hafskjold L, Sundler AJ, Holmström IK, Sundling V, Van Dulmen S, Eide H. A cross-sectional study on person-centred communication in the care of older people: the COMHOME study protocol. BMJ Open [Internet]. 2015;5(4). doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-007864
43. Kim S, Fadem S. Communication matters: exploring older adults’ current use of patient portals. Int J Med Inform [Internet]. 2018;120:126-36. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2018.10.004
44. Williams KN, Perkhounkova Y, Jao YL, Bossen A, Hein M, Chung S, et al. Person-centered communication for nursing home residents with dementia: Four communication analysis methods. West J Nurs Res [Internet]. 2018;40(7):1012–31. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0193945917697226
45. Zhang M, Zhao H, Meng FP. Elderspeak to resident dementia patients increases resistiveness to care in health care profession. Inquiry-J Health Care Organ Provis Financ [Internet]. 2020;57. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0046958020948668
46. de Queiróz-Coutinho AT, Rodrigues-Vilela MB, Lopes-Timóteo de Lima ML, de Lima-Silva V. Social communication and functional independence of the elderly in a community assisted by the family health strategy. Rev CEFAC [Internet]. 2018;20(3):363–73. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1982-0216201820313417
Downloads
Copyright (c) 2025 MedUNAB
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
| Article metrics | |
|---|---|
| Abstract views | |
| Galley vies | |
| PDF Views | |
| HTML views | |
| Other views | |
