Tze Pin Ng1, Ling Hui Audrey Ling1, Liang Feng1, Ma Shwe Zin Nyunt1, Lei Feng1, Mathew Niti2, Boon Yeow Tan3, Gribson Chan4, Sue Anne Khoo5, Sue Mei Chan6, Philip Yap7, Keng Bee Yap8. 1. Gerontology Research Programme, Department of Psychological Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore. 2. Performance and Technology Assessment Department, Ministry of Health, Singapore. 3. Medical Services Department, St Luke's Hospital, Singapore. 4. Rehabilitation Services Division, St Luke's Hospital, Singapore. 5. Psychological Medicine Department, Khoo Teck Puat Hospital, Singapore. 6. Nutrition and Dietetics Department, Khoo Teck Puat Hospital, Singapore. 7. Geriatric Medicine Department, Khoo Teck Puat Hospital, Singapore. 8. Geriatric Medicine and Palliative Medicine Department, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital.
Abstract
Background: Cognitive, physical, and nutritional interventions may produce different cognitive effects for different groups of older persons. We investigated simultaneously the cognitive outcomes of cognitive, physical, and nutritional interventions singly and in combinations in older persons with the physical frailty phenotype at particular risk of cognitive decline. Method: Pre-frail and frail participants were randomly allocated to 24 weeks nutritional supplementation (N = 49), physical training (N = 48), cognitive training (N = 50), combination intervention (N = 49), or usual care control (N = 50). Cognitive domain and global functions were assessed at baseline (0M), 6 month (6M), and 12 month (12M). Results: The control group showed declines in z-scores (from -0.100 to -0.244) of all domains. The cognitive training compared to control group showed the greatest increase in global cognition at 6M (0.094 vs -0.174, p = .006) and 12M (0.099 vs -0.142, p = .002), immediate memory at 6M (0.164 vs -0.211, p = .010) and 12M (0.182 vs -0.142, p = .040), delayed memory at 6M (p = .010), and attention at 6M (p = .025). Nutritional intervention showed benefits at 6M for immediate memory (p = .028) and delayed memory (p = .024), but physical training showed no positive effects. The combination group showed the greatest increase for visuospatial construction at 6M (0.215 vs -0.141, p = .010) and 12M (0.166 vs -0.180, p = .016), and for global cognition at 12M (p = .016) and language at 12M (p = .023). Conclusion: Among frail older persons, cognitive training conferred the greatest cognitive benefits. Nutritional and physical interventions singly were associated with modest short-term or no cognitive benefits, but their combined effects on visuospatial construction should be further investigated.
RCT Entities:
Background: Cognitive, physical, and nutritional interventions may produce different cognitive effects for different groups of older persons. We investigated simultaneously the cognitive outcomes of cognitive, physical, and nutritional interventions singly and in combinations in older persons with the physical frailty phenotype at particular risk of cognitive decline. Method: Pre-frail and frail participants were randomly allocated to 24 weeks nutritional supplementation (N = 49), physical training (N = 48), cognitive training (N = 50), combination intervention (N = 49), or usual care control (N = 50). Cognitive domain and global functions were assessed at baseline (0M), 6 month (6M), and 12 month (12M). Results: The control group showed declines in z-scores (from -0.100 to -0.244) of all domains. The cognitive training compared to control group showed the greatest increase in global cognition at 6M (0.094 vs -0.174, p = .006) and 12M (0.099 vs -0.142, p = .002), immediate memory at 6M (0.164 vs -0.211, p = .010) and 12M (0.182 vs -0.142, p = .040), delayed memory at 6M (p = .010), and attention at 6M (p = .025). Nutritional intervention showed benefits at 6M for immediate memory (p = .028) and delayed memory (p = .024), but physical training showed no positive effects. The combination group showed the greatest increase for visuospatial construction at 6M (0.215 vs -0.141, p = .010) and 12M (0.166 vs -0.180, p = .016), and for global cognition at 12M (p = .016) and language at 12M (p = .023). Conclusion: Among frail older persons, cognitive training conferred the greatest cognitive benefits. Nutritional and physical interventions singly were associated with modest short-term or no cognitive benefits, but their combined effects on visuospatial construction should be further investigated.
Authors: Adam J Woods; Ronald Cohen; Michael Marsiske; Gene E Alexander; Sara J Czaja; Samuel Wu Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2017-12-05 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Kimberly Ann Chew; Xin Xu; Paula Siongco; Steven Villaraza; April Ka Sin Phua; Zi Xuen Wong; Chooi Yu Chung; Ning Tang; Effie Chew; Christiani Jeyakumar Henry; Edward Koo; Christopher Chen Journal: Alzheimers Dement (N Y) Date: 2021-03-15
Authors: X Xu; K A Chew; Z X Wong; A K S Phua; E J Y Chong; C K L Teo; N Sathe; Y C Chooi; W P F Chia; C J Henry; E Chew; M Wang; A B Maier; N Kandiah; C L-H Chen Journal: J Prev Alzheimers Dis Date: 2022
Authors: AnnaLynn M Williams; Kevin R Krull; Carrie R Howell; Pia Banerjee; Tara M Brinkman; Sue C Kaste; Robyn E Partin; Deokumar Srivastava; Yutaka Yasui; Gregory T Armstrong; Leslie L Robison; Melissa M Hudson; Kirsten K Ness Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2021-07-20 Impact factor: 44.544