Examining Different Motor Learning Paradigms for Improving Balance Recovery Abilities Among Older Adults Random versus Block training: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Trial.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q3 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Gerontology Pub Date : 2025-06-13 DOI:10.1159/000546907
Hadas Nachmani, Inbal Paran, Moti Salti, Ilan Shelef, Noam Margalit, Michael Schwenk, Itshak Melzer
{"title":"Examining Different Motor Learning Paradigms for Improving Balance Recovery Abilities Among Older Adults Random versus Block training: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Trial.","authors":"Hadas Nachmani, Inbal Paran, Moti Salti, Ilan Shelef, Noam Margalit, Michael Schwenk, Itshak Melzer","doi":"10.1159/000546907","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Older adults can reduce the risk of falls after participation in a Perturbation-Based Balance Training (PBBT). We aimed to compare two perturbation motor learning paradigms: random vs block practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty community-dwelling older adults were recruited and randomly allocated to a random PBBT group (n=8), participants were exposed to unannounced perturbations in multiple directions during each training session, or a block PBBT group (n=12) participants experienced perturbations from a single during every training session during treadmill walking. Both groups received eight training sessions over a four-weeks period that included a concurrent cognitive task during training. Primary outcome measures were parameters of reactive stepping i.e., step-thresholds in walking and kinematics of reactive stepping during walking; and secondary outcome measures were proactive balance, i.e. voluntary step test and cognitive performance. All outcomes were measured before and after PBBT.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both PBBT groups improved their ability to cope with higher perturbations post training and a reduction in Center of Mass path displacement during the recovery after the perturbation in walking. No improvement was found in voluntary stepping post training, both groups, however, showed improvement in cognitive performance post-training.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Results show some improvements in reactive stepping performance but not in proactive voluntary stepping in both random and block PBBT methods, with no superiority of one training method over the other. Some improvements in cognitive performance in both groups suggest a transfer effect post training, regardless of training method. Given the small sample size, results are preliminary and should be interpreted with caution.</p>","PeriodicalId":12662,"journal":{"name":"Gerontology","volume":" ","pages":"1-23"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gerontology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000546907","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Older adults can reduce the risk of falls after participation in a Perturbation-Based Balance Training (PBBT). We aimed to compare two perturbation motor learning paradigms: random vs block practice.

Methods: Twenty community-dwelling older adults were recruited and randomly allocated to a random PBBT group (n=8), participants were exposed to unannounced perturbations in multiple directions during each training session, or a block PBBT group (n=12) participants experienced perturbations from a single during every training session during treadmill walking. Both groups received eight training sessions over a four-weeks period that included a concurrent cognitive task during training. Primary outcome measures were parameters of reactive stepping i.e., step-thresholds in walking and kinematics of reactive stepping during walking; and secondary outcome measures were proactive balance, i.e. voluntary step test and cognitive performance. All outcomes were measured before and after PBBT.

Results: Both PBBT groups improved their ability to cope with higher perturbations post training and a reduction in Center of Mass path displacement during the recovery after the perturbation in walking. No improvement was found in voluntary stepping post training, both groups, however, showed improvement in cognitive performance post-training.

Discussion: Results show some improvements in reactive stepping performance but not in proactive voluntary stepping in both random and block PBBT methods, with no superiority of one training method over the other. Some improvements in cognitive performance in both groups suggest a transfer effect post training, regardless of training method. Given the small sample size, results are preliminary and should be interpreted with caution.

不同运动学习模式对提高老年人平衡恢复能力的影响:随机与块训练:一项随机对照试验。
老年人在参加基于扰动的平衡训练(PBBT)后可以降低跌倒的风险。我们的目的是比较两种扰动运动学习范式:随机和块练习。方法:招募了20名居住在社区的老年人,并随机分配到随机PBBT组(n=8),参与者在每次训练期间暴露于多个方向的未通知的扰动,或者一个块PBBT组(n=12)参与者在每次跑步机行走训练期间经历单个扰动。两组都在四周的时间里接受了八次训练,其中包括在训练过程中同时进行的认知任务。主要结局指标是反应性步进的参数,即步行时的步进阈值和步行时反应性步进的运动学;次要结果测量是主动平衡,即自愿步骤测试和认知表现。在PBBT前后测量所有结果。结果:两个PBBT组都提高了训练后应对高扰动的能力,并且在行走扰动后恢复期间质心路径位移减少。自愿踏步训练后未发现改善,但两组在训练后的认知表现均有改善。讨论:结果表明,随机和分组PBBT训练方法在被动步进性能上有所改善,但在主动步进方面没有改善,没有一种训练方法比另一种训练方法优越。无论采用何种训练方法,两组的认知表现都有一定程度的改善,这表明训练后存在转移效应。由于样本量小,结果是初步的,应谨慎解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Gerontology
Gerontology 医学-老年医学
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
94
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: In view of the ever-increasing fraction of elderly people, understanding the mechanisms of aging and age-related diseases has become a matter of urgent necessity. ''Gerontology'', the oldest journal in the field, responds to this need by drawing topical contributions from multiple disciplines to support the fundamental goals of extending active life and enhancing its quality. The range of papers is classified into four sections. In the Clinical Section, the aetiology, pathogenesis, prevention and treatment of agerelated diseases are discussed from a gerontological rather than a geriatric viewpoint. The Experimental Section contains up-to-date contributions from basic gerontological research. Papers dealing with behavioural development and related topics are placed in the Behavioural Science Section. Basic aspects of regeneration in different experimental biological systems as well as in the context of medical applications are dealt with in a special section that also contains information on technological advances for the elderly. Providing a primary source of high-quality papers covering all aspects of aging in humans and animals, ''Gerontology'' serves as an ideal information tool for all readers interested in the topic of aging from a broad perspective.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信