对患有轻度认知障碍的老年人进行基于扰动的双重任务评估

IF 1.3 Q3 REHABILITATION
Lakshmi Kannan, Jessica Pitts, Tony Szturm, Rudri Purohit, Tanvi Bhatt
{"title":"对患有轻度认知障碍的老年人进行基于扰动的双重任务评估","authors":"Lakshmi Kannan, Jessica Pitts, Tony Szturm, Rudri Purohit, Tanvi Bhatt","doi":"10.3389/fresc.2024.1384582","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Dual tasking (i.e., concurrent performance of motor and cognitive task) is significantly impaired in older adults with mild cognitive impairment (OAwMCI) compared to cognitively intact older adults (CIOA) and has been associated with increased fall risk. Dual task studies have primarily examined volitionally driven events, and the effects of mild cognitive impairment on reactive balance control (i.e., the ability to recover from unexpected balance threats) are unexplored. We examined the effect of cognitive tasks on reactive balance control in OAwMCI compared to CIOA.Adults >55 years were included and completed the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) to categorize them as OAwMCI (MoCA: 18–24, n = 15) or CIOA (MoCA: ≥25, n = 15). Both OAwMCI [MoCA: 22.4 (2.2), 65.4 (6.1) years, 3 females] and CIOA [MoCA: 28.4 (1.3), 68.2 (5.5) years, 10 females] responded to large magnitude stance slip-like perturbations alone (single task) and while performing perceptual cognitive tasks targeting the visuomotor domain (target and tracking game). In these tasks, participants rotated their head horizontally to control a motion mouse and catch a falling target (target game) or track a moving object (track). Margin of stability (MOS) and fall outcome (harness load cell >30% body weight) were used to quantify reactive balance control. Cognitive performance was determined using performance error (target) and sum of errors (tracking). A 3 × 2 repeated measures ANOVA examined the effect of group and task on MOS, and generalized estimating equations (GEE) model was used to determine changes in fall outcome between groups and tasks. 2 × 2 repeated measures ANOVAs examined the effect of group and task on cognitive performance.Compared to CIOA, OAwMCI exhibited significantly deteriorated MOS and greater number of falls during both single task and dual task (p < 0.05), and lower dual task tracking performance (p < 0.01). Compared to single task, both OAwMCI and CIOA exhibited significantly deteriorated perceptual cognitive performance during dual task (p < 0.05); however, no change in MOS or fall outcome between single task and dual task was observed.Cognitive impairment may diminish the ability to compensate and provide attentional resources demanded by sensory systems to integrate perturbation specific information, resulting in deteriorated ability to recover balance control among OAwMCI.","PeriodicalId":73102,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perturbation-based dual task assessment in older adults with mild cognitive impairment\",\"authors\":\"Lakshmi Kannan, Jessica Pitts, Tony Szturm, Rudri Purohit, Tanvi Bhatt\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fresc.2024.1384582\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Dual tasking (i.e., concurrent performance of motor and cognitive task) is significantly impaired in older adults with mild cognitive impairment (OAwMCI) compared to cognitively intact older adults (CIOA) and has been associated with increased fall risk. Dual task studies have primarily examined volitionally driven events, and the effects of mild cognitive impairment on reactive balance control (i.e., the ability to recover from unexpected balance threats) are unexplored. We examined the effect of cognitive tasks on reactive balance control in OAwMCI compared to CIOA.Adults >55 years were included and completed the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) to categorize them as OAwMCI (MoCA: 18–24, n = 15) or CIOA (MoCA: ≥25, n = 15). Both OAwMCI [MoCA: 22.4 (2.2), 65.4 (6.1) years, 3 females] and CIOA [MoCA: 28.4 (1.3), 68.2 (5.5) years, 10 females] responded to large magnitude stance slip-like perturbations alone (single task) and while performing perceptual cognitive tasks targeting the visuomotor domain (target and tracking game). In these tasks, participants rotated their head horizontally to control a motion mouse and catch a falling target (target game) or track a moving object (track). Margin of stability (MOS) and fall outcome (harness load cell >30% body weight) were used to quantify reactive balance control. Cognitive performance was determined using performance error (target) and sum of errors (tracking). A 3 × 2 repeated measures ANOVA examined the effect of group and task on MOS, and generalized estimating equations (GEE) model was used to determine changes in fall outcome between groups and tasks. 2 × 2 repeated measures ANOVAs examined the effect of group and task on cognitive performance.Compared to CIOA, OAwMCI exhibited significantly deteriorated MOS and greater number of falls during both single task and dual task (p < 0.05), and lower dual task tracking performance (p < 0.01). Compared to single task, both OAwMCI and CIOA exhibited significantly deteriorated perceptual cognitive performance during dual task (p < 0.05); however, no change in MOS or fall outcome between single task and dual task was observed.Cognitive impairment may diminish the ability to compensate and provide attentional resources demanded by sensory systems to integrate perturbation specific information, resulting in deteriorated ability to recover balance control among OAwMCI.\",\"PeriodicalId\":73102,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fresc.2024.1384582\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fresc.2024.1384582","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

与认知功能完好的老年人(CIOA)相比,轻度认知障碍老年人(OAwMCI)的双重任务能力(即同时完成运动和认知任务)明显受损,并且与跌倒风险增加有关。双重任务研究主要考察的是自愿驱动的事件,而轻度认知障碍对反应性平衡控制(即从意外的平衡威胁中恢复的能力)的影响尚未被研究。我们研究了认知任务对 OAwMCI 与 CIOA 的反应性平衡控制的影响。年龄大于 55 岁的成年人被纳入研究范围,并完成蒙特利尔认知评估(MoCA),将其分为 OAwMCI(MoCA:18-24 岁,n = 15)或 CIOA(MoCA:≥25 岁,n = 15)。OAwMCI [MoCA:22.4 (2.2),65.4 (6.1)岁,3 名女性] 和 CIOA [MoCA:28.4 (1.3),68.2 (5.5)岁,10 名女性] 在单独(单一任务)和执行针对视觉运动领域的感知认知任务(目标和跟踪游戏)时,都会对大振幅站立滑动样扰动做出反应。在这些任务中,受试者水平转动头部控制运动鼠标,捕捉下落的目标(目标游戏)或追踪移动的物体(追踪)。稳定幅度(MOS)和跌倒结果(安全带负荷单元>30%体重)用于量化反应性平衡控制。认知表现则通过表现误差(目标)和误差总和(追踪)来确定。3 × 2 重复测量方差分析检验了组别和任务对 MOS 的影响,并使用广义估计方程(GEE)模型确定了组别和任务之间跌倒结果的变化。与 CIOA 相比,OAwMCI 的 MOS 明显降低,在单一任务和双重任务中跌倒的次数增加(P < 0.05),双重任务的追踪能力降低(P < 0.01)。与单一任务相比,OAwMCI 和 CIOA 在双重任务中的感知认知能力均明显下降(p < 0.05);然而,在单一任务和双重任务中,MOS 或跌倒结果均无变化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Perturbation-based dual task assessment in older adults with mild cognitive impairment
Dual tasking (i.e., concurrent performance of motor and cognitive task) is significantly impaired in older adults with mild cognitive impairment (OAwMCI) compared to cognitively intact older adults (CIOA) and has been associated with increased fall risk. Dual task studies have primarily examined volitionally driven events, and the effects of mild cognitive impairment on reactive balance control (i.e., the ability to recover from unexpected balance threats) are unexplored. We examined the effect of cognitive tasks on reactive balance control in OAwMCI compared to CIOA.Adults >55 years were included and completed the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) to categorize them as OAwMCI (MoCA: 18–24, n = 15) or CIOA (MoCA: ≥25, n = 15). Both OAwMCI [MoCA: 22.4 (2.2), 65.4 (6.1) years, 3 females] and CIOA [MoCA: 28.4 (1.3), 68.2 (5.5) years, 10 females] responded to large magnitude stance slip-like perturbations alone (single task) and while performing perceptual cognitive tasks targeting the visuomotor domain (target and tracking game). In these tasks, participants rotated their head horizontally to control a motion mouse and catch a falling target (target game) or track a moving object (track). Margin of stability (MOS) and fall outcome (harness load cell >30% body weight) were used to quantify reactive balance control. Cognitive performance was determined using performance error (target) and sum of errors (tracking). A 3 × 2 repeated measures ANOVA examined the effect of group and task on MOS, and generalized estimating equations (GEE) model was used to determine changes in fall outcome between groups and tasks. 2 × 2 repeated measures ANOVAs examined the effect of group and task on cognitive performance.Compared to CIOA, OAwMCI exhibited significantly deteriorated MOS and greater number of falls during both single task and dual task (p < 0.05), and lower dual task tracking performance (p < 0.01). Compared to single task, both OAwMCI and CIOA exhibited significantly deteriorated perceptual cognitive performance during dual task (p < 0.05); however, no change in MOS or fall outcome between single task and dual task was observed.Cognitive impairment may diminish the ability to compensate and provide attentional resources demanded by sensory systems to integrate perturbation specific information, resulting in deteriorated ability to recover balance control among OAwMCI.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信