Feasibility and potential cognitive impact of a cognitive-motor dual-task training program using a custom exergame in older adults: A pilot study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction Dual-task training may be relevant and efficient in the context of active aging. An issue in training programs lies in enhancing the adherence of participants. This can potentially be improved using games as support. We designed and developed a custom interactive exergame in this way. The objective of this pilot study was to explore the potential use of this exergame and the feasibility of our intervention, including the level of safety and adherence. The result’s trends on cognitive and motor capacities, as well as on the level of motivation for physical activity, fear of falling, and quality of life of participants, were also explored. Methods Older adults aged 65 years or older were recruited and realized 30 min of supervised training in groups of 4, 2–3 times a week for 12 weeks. Exercises consisted of incorporated cognitive and motor dual tasks, with an increased difficulty over the weeks. Our program’s safety, engagement, attendance, and completion levels were evaluated. Participants’ postural control in single-task and dual-task conditions, as well as their performances in mental inhibition, flexibility, working memory, mobility, and postural control, and their levels of motivation for physical activity, fear of falling, and quality of life were also assessed. We realized a per protocol statistical analysis with a p -value set at 0.05. Results Thirty-nine participants (aged 84.6 ± 8.5 years) were recruited. No adverse events, and 89% adherence, 88% attendance, and 87% completion rates were observed. A potentially significant effect of our exergame on working memory in single-task conditions and on the cognitive aspect of dual-task conditions was also observed. We observed no differences in other parameters. Discussion Our exergame seemed feasible and safe and was enjoyed by participants, mainly due to the gamification of our training program. Moreover, our exergame may be efficient for cognitive training in older adults, as well as for the maintenance of motor functions, motivation for physical activity, fear of falling, and quality of life levels. This constitutes the first step for our solution with interesting results that need to be further studied.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».