| Literature DB >> 30425679 |
Karen Z H Li1,2,3, Louis Bherer3,4,5,6, Anat Mirelman7,8, Inbal Maidan7,8, Jeffrey M Hausdorff7,9,10.
Abstract
A substantial corpus of evidence suggests that the cognitive involvement in postural control and gait increases with aging. A large portion of such studies were based on dual-task experimental designs, which typically use the simultaneous performance of a motor task (e.g., static or dynamic balancing, walking) and a continuous cognitive task (e.g., mental arithmetic, tone detection). This focused review takes a cognitive neuroscience of aging perspective in interpreting cognitive motor dual-task findings. Specifically, we consider the importance of identifying the neural circuits that are engaged by the cognitive task in relation to those that are engaged during motor task performance. Following the principle of neural overlap, dual-task interference should be greatest when the cognitive and motor tasks engage the same neural circuits. Moreover, the literature on brain aging in general, and models of dedifferentiation and compensation, in particular, suggest that in cognitive motor dual-task performance, the cognitive task engages different neural substrates in young as compared to older adults. Also considered is the concept of multisensory aging, and the degree to which the age-related decline of other systems (e.g., vision, hearing) contribute to cognitive load. Finally, we discuss recent work on focused cognitive training, exercise and multimodal training of older adults and their effects on postural and gait outcomes. In keeping with the principle of neural overlap, the available cognitive training research suggests that targeting processes such as dividing attention and inhibition lead to improved balance and gait in older adults. However, more studies are needed that include functional neuroimaging during actual, upright performance of gait and balance tasks, in order to directly test the principle of neural overlap, and to better optimize the design of intervention studies to improve gait and posture.Entities:
Keywords: aging; balance; cognition; cognitive training; dual task; gait; motor-cognitive interference
Year: 2018 PMID: 30425679 PMCID: PMC6219267 DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2018.00913
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurol ISSN: 1664-2295 Impact factor: 4.003
Figure 1Conceptual diagram adapted from Park and Reuter-Lorenz (11). Asterisks indicate our modifications and extensions, particularly the inclusion of motor and sensory functioning. The schematic shows the negative aspects of neurocognitive aging (blue) that trigger compensation via functional recruitment in older adults (red). These maladaptive and adaptive factors jointly contribute to observed motor, cognitive, sensory functions (green). Cognitive enrichment (yellow) can ameliorate aspects of brain aging and facilitate compensatory efficiency if there is neural overlap between the improved and targeted outcomes. Motor, cognitive, and sensory functions benefit from, and compete for, common capacity (e.g., prefrontal cortex), particularly during complex behaviors such as cognitive-motor dual-tasking. Copyright permission not required.
Figure 2fNIRS results (102) showing significant increases in blood oxygenation (HbO2) as a function of walking complexity, i.e., the greater the cognitive load, the greater the increase in frontal activation during walking. Copyright permission not required.
Figure 3fNIRS data [adapted from (103)] 19 young, 14 older adults during treadmill walking alone or with n-back cognitive load. Both age groups showed greater bilateral HbO2 change from single motor to dual task conditions, OA had greater bilateral activations. Copyright permission not required.
Figure 4Bars show magnitude of training-related improvements in postural sway during single support balancing after computerized dual-task training vs. no-treatment [adapted from (114)]. Copyright permission not required.
Figure 5In patients with mild to moderate Parkinson's disease after executive function training [adapted from (117)]. Training-related changes over time (p = 035) in a clinical index of mobility: the Timed-Up-and-Go (TUG). Copyright permission not required.
Figure 6fMRI data adapted from Maidan et al. (132). Training-specific differences in brain activation during obstacle negotiation after two interventions. The images present the 4 brain areas with different patterns of activation after training between the 2 training arms, while the corresponding graphs show the changes in mean β values for voxels in each of these 4 brain areas before and after training. P-values are from mixed model analyzes and represent the interaction between time (pre- vs. post-training) and training arm (treadmill training, TT vs. treadmill training with virtual reality, TT + VR). BA, Brodmann area; IFG, inferior frontal gyrus; MTG, middle temporal gyrus. Figure reproduced by permission of Wolters Kluwer Health Inc. (4386371208392).