| Literature DB >> 25089518 |
Artin Jabourian1, Sylvie Lancrenon2, Catherine Delva2, Alain Perreve-Genet3, Jean-Pierre Lablanchy4, Maritza Jabourian1.
Abstract
Psychomotor retardation, especially motor and cognitive slowing down, has been described many times in the elderly but to our knowledge, has never been examined in healthy middle-aged adults. The present study explores whether walking time may provide an early signal of cognitive performance, using 266 healthy adults ([18-65] years old, mean age: 45.7±12.9 years) who were also subdivided in 2 groups: under or over 50. Walking time (50 meters) and cognitive performances (mini-mental state examination, Benton Visual Retention Test and Rey Complex Figure) were assessed; total psychometric score was the sum of individual test scores. Analyses were controlled for age, gender, education level, height and weight. The mean psychometric scores were within the normal range. A substantial proportion of subjects exhibited low performance in some aspects of visuospatial memory, particularly in the older subset. In the total population, walking time was negatively correlated with all cognitive tests, particularly to total psychometric score (R = -0.817, p<0.0001); the unique contribution of walking time on all cognitive scores was very high (delta R-squared = 0.496). In the older subset, performances on walk and cognition were lower than in the younger subset. Total psychometric score showed the strongest correlation with walking time in the older subset (R = -0.867; p<0.001). In all subsets, walking time was the main explanatory variable of the total psychometric score (delta R-squared: ≤ 49 = 0.361; ≥50 = 0.613). These findings indicate that i) a significant proportion of adults without cognitive complaints exhibit low cognitive performance including visuospatial memory and longer walking time, ii) cognitive functioning is strongly correlated to walking time in healthy middle-aged adults, iii) gait velocity (GV) could be an indicator of cognitive performance in some important cognitive domains. These results warrant further investigation because such data may represent a marker for the detection of middle-aged adults who are at risk for further cognitive decline.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25089518 PMCID: PMC4121134 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0103211
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Age, walking time and cognitive test scores.
| Whole study | Subset 1: | Subset 2: | Comparison | ||
| population | Subjects ≤ 49 | subjects ≥ 50 | between | ||
| (n = 266) | years old (n = 137) | years old (n = 129) | subsets(1) | ||
|
| 45.7 ± 12.9 | 35.3 ± 9.1 | 56.8 ± 4.4 | - | |
|
| 31.8 ± 7.8 | 28.9 ± 6.0 | 34.9 ± 8.4 | <0.0001 | |
|
|
| 101.8 ± 16.3 | 106.7 ± 11.1 | 96.5 ± 19.1 | <0.0001 |
|
|
| 51.50% | 40.10% | 63.60% | 0.0001 |
|
|
| ||||
|
| 23.0 ± 4.9 | 24.8 ± 3.3 | 21.0 ± 5.5 | <0.0001 | |
|
|
| 44.00% | 28.50% | 60.50% | <0.0001 |
|
| |||||
|
| 33.0 ± 4.5 | 34.2 ± 2.4 | 31.8 ± 5.8 | 0.0054 | |
|
|
| 20.70% | 10.20% | 31.80% | <0.0001 |
|
| |||||
|
| 18.4 ± 7.4 | 19.7 ± 6.6 | 16.9 ± 8.0 | 0.0026 | |
|
|
| 71.40% | 68.60% | 74.40% | 0.29 |
|
|
| ||||
|
| 27.4 ± 3.2 | 28.0 ± 2.3 | 26.8 ± 3.9 | 0.0171 | |
|
|
| 17.30% | 8.80% | 26.40% | 0.0001 |
|
|
Values are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation in the whole study population and in the two subsets of subjects by age range. Percentages correspond to the ratio of low performers for each item. P values denote highly significant differences between the two age subsets.
(1) Comparisons between subsets are performed by a Mann-Whitney U-test for the scores and walking time (non normal distributions) and by a chi-square test for the % of subjects with low scores.
Simple regression - Relationship between cognitive test performance and walking time.
| Simple regression | ||
| Linear regression | ||
| equation (Y) | R squared | |
|
| −0.279x+36.28 | 0.455 |
|
| −0.411x+46.12 | 0.502 |
|
| −0.564x+36.33 | 0.352 |
|
| −0.447x+37.19 | 0.512 |
|
| −1.701x+155.93 | 0.668 |
| ≤ 49 years old | −1.195x+141.28 | 0.413 |
| ≥ 50 years old | −1.976x+165.55 | 0.752 |
Simple linear regression with the cognitive tests scores as explained variables and walking time as explanatory variable.
Figure 1Total psychometric score and walking time.
The relationship between the total psychometric score and walking time is visualized with a dot plot of the data and a linear regression of the total psychometric score and walking time in the whole study population (a) and in the subset of volunteers aged 50 years and over (b). The linear regression equations and R squared values are indicated in the figures.
Figure 2Scatter plot: MMSE score and explaining variables (age, education and walking time).
Dot plots and linear regression for MMSE score against the main explaining variables: age, education and walking time. Subjects <50 years old are represented by red crosses, subjects ≥ 50 years old are represented by blue circles.
Figure 6Scatter plot: Total psychometric score and explaining variables (age, education and walking time).
Dot plots and linear regression for total psychometric score against the main explaining variables: age, education and walking time. Subjects <50 years old are represented by red crosses, subjects ≥ 50 years old are represented by blue circles.
Step-wise multiple regression - Relationship between cognitive test performance and walking time.
| Step-wise multiple regression | ||||
| Multiple R squared table | ||||
| First step | Second step | Final model | ||
|
| Age | Age | All | Unique |
| Education(a) | Education | confounders(c) | contribution of | |
| Walking time(b) | walking time (d) | |||
|
| 0.084 | 0.463 | 0.484 | 0.379 |
|
| 0.121 | 0.506 | 0.518 | 0.385 |
|
| 0.102 | 0.367 | 0.376 | 0.265 |
|
| 0.191 | 0.527 | 0.537 | 0.336 |
|
| 0.184 | 0.680 | 0.692 | 0.496 |
| ≤ 49 years old | 0.071 | 0.432 | 0.461 | 0.361 |
| ≥ 50 years old | 0.146 | 0.759 | 0.789 | 0.613 |
Step-wise multiple linear regression with the cognitive tests scores as explained variables and walking time, age, gender, education level, height and weight as explanatory variables:
a) First step, age and education level are forced into the model,
b) Second step, walking time enters the model as first explanatory variable,
c) Then, the other confounders (gender, height, weight) were added one by one, R-squared for the final model is given.
d) Delta multiple R-squared between second step and first step, all p<0.0001.
Hierarchical Multiple regression - Relationship between cognitive test performance and walking time.
| Hierarchical Multiple regression | |||
| Multiple R squared table | |||
|
| (a)Age | (b) | (c) |
| Education | + | Unique | |
| Gender | Walking time | contribution of | |
| Height | walking time | ||
| Weight | |||
|
| 0.116 | 0.483 | 0.367 |
|
| 0.146 | 0.518 | 0.372 |
|
| 0.145 | 0.376 | 0.231 |
|
| 0.200 | 0.536 | 0.336 |
|
| 0.223 | 0.692 | 0.469 |
| ≤ 49 years old | 0.079 | 0.465 | 0.386 |
| ≥ 50 years old | 0.242 | 0.764 | 0.522 |
Hierarchical multiple linear regression with the cognitive tests scores as explained variables, age, education, gender, height and weight as explanatory variables:
a- First: age, gender, education level, height and weight were forced into the model
b- Then walking time was added to the model “a”
c- Unique contribution of the walking time (R-squared of model b – model a), all p<0.0001.