J Blackwood1, T Shubert, K Fogarty, C Chase. 1. J. Blackwood, University of Michigan-Flint, Physical Therapy, 303 East Kearsley Street, Flint, MI 48502, USA, 8107623373, FAX: 8107666668, jblackwo@umflint.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Cognitive intervention studies have reported improvements in various domains of cognition as well as a transfer effect of improved function post training. Despite the availability of web based cognitive training programs, most intervention studies have been performed under the supervision of researchers. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to first, examine the feasibility of a six week home based computerized cognitive training (CCT) program in a group of community dwelling older adults and, second, to determine if a CCT program which focused on set shifting, attention, and visual spatial ability impacted fall risk measure performance. DESIGN: This pilot study used a pretest/posttest experimental design with randomization by testing site to an intervention or control group. PARTICIPANTS: Community dwelling older adults (mean age = 74.6 years) participated in either the control (N=25) or the intervention group (N=19). INTERVENTION: Intervention group subjects participated in 6 weeks of home based CCT 3x/week for an average of 23 minutes/session, using an online CCT program. MEASUREMENTS: Comparisons of mean scores on three measures of physical function (usual gait speed, five times sit to stand, timed up and go) were completed at baseline and week 7. RESULTS: Following the completion of an average of 18 sessions of CCT at home with good adherence (86%) and retention (92%) rates, a statistically significant difference in gait speed was found between groups with an average improvement of 0.14 m/s in the intervention group. CONCLUSION: A home based CCT program is a feasible approach to targeting cognitive impairments known to influence fall risk and changes in gait in older adults.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: Cognitive intervention studies have reported improvements in various domains of cognition as well as a transfer effect of improved function post training. Despite the availability of web based cognitive training programs, most intervention studies have been performed under the supervision of researchers. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to first, examine the feasibility of a six week home based computerized cognitive training (CCT) program in a group of community dwelling older adults and, second, to determine if a CCT program which focused on set shifting, attention, and visual spatial ability impacted fall risk measure performance. DESIGN: This pilot study used a pretest/posttest experimental design with randomization by testing site to an intervention or control group. PARTICIPANTS: Community dwelling older adults (mean age = 74.6 years) participated in either the control (N=25) or the intervention group (N=19). INTERVENTION: Intervention group subjects participated in 6 weeks of home based CCT 3x/week for an average of 23 minutes/session, using an online CCT program. MEASUREMENTS: Comparisons of mean scores on three measures of physical function (usual gait speed, five times sit to stand, timed up and go) were completed at baseline and week 7. RESULTS: Following the completion of an average of 18 sessions of CCT at home with good adherence (86%) and retention (92%) rates, a statistically significant difference in gait speed was found between groups with an average improvement of 0.14 m/s in the intervention group. CONCLUSION: A home based CCT program is a feasible approach to targeting cognitive impairments known to influence fall risk and changes in gait in older adults.
Authors: Joe Verghese; Jeannette Mahoney; Anne F Ambrose; Cuiling Wang; Roee Holtzer Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2010-07-19 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Karen Z H Li; E Roudaia; M Lussier; L Bherer; A Leroux; P A McKinley Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2010-09-13 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Renae L Smith-Ray; Susan L Hughes; Thomas R Prohaska; Deborah M Little; Donald A Jurivich; Donald Hedeker Journal: J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci Date: 2013-11-05 Impact factor: 4.077
Authors: G Abellan van Kan; Y Rolland; S Andrieu; J Bauer; O Beauchet; M Bonnefoy; M Cesari; L M Donini; S Gillette Guyonnet; M Inzitari; F Nourhashemi; G Onder; P Ritz; A Salva; M Visser; B Vellas Journal: J Nutr Health Aging Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 4.075
Authors: Nandini Deshpande; E Jeffrey Metter; Stefania Bandinelli; Jack Guralnik; Luigi Ferrucci Journal: Age Ageing Date: 2009-06-23 Impact factor: 10.668
Authors: Jessica Battisto; Katharina V Echt; Steven L Wolf; Paul Weiss; Madeleine E Hackney Journal: Neurorehabil Neural Repair Date: 2018-10-15 Impact factor: 3.919
Authors: Tina E Brinkley; Miles Berger; Kathryn E Callahan; Robert A Fieo; Lee A Jennings; Jill K Morris; Heather M Wilkins; Stephen B Kritchevsky Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2018-08-10 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Laura E Middleton; Maria I Ventura; Wendy Santos-Modesitt; Gina Poelke; Kristine Yaffe; Deborah E Barnes Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2017-10-21 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Angie A Diaz Baquero; Manuel A Franco-Martín; Esther Parra Vidales; José Miguel Toribio-Guzmán; Yolanda Bueno-Aguado; Fernando Martínez Abad; María V Perea Bartolomé; Aysan Mahmoudi Asl; Henriëtte G van der Roest Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2022 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: S Belleville; M Cuesta; M Bieler-Aeschlimann; K Giacomino; A Widmer; A G Mittaz Hager; D Perez-Marcos; S Cardin; B Boller; N Bier; M Aubertin-Leheudre; L Bherer; N Berryman; S Agrigoroaei; J F Demonet Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2020-08-28 Impact factor: 3.921
Authors: Angie A Diaz Baquero; María V Perea Bartolomé; José Miguel Toribio-Guzmán; Fernando Martínez-Abad; Esther Parra Vidales; Yolanda Bueno Aguado; Henriëtte G van der Roest; Manuel A Franco-Martín Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-03-19 Impact factor: 4.241