| Literature DB >> 31824295 |
Manuela Adcock1, Melanie Thalmann1, Alexandra Schättin1, Federico Gennaro1, Eling D de Bruin1,2.
Abstract
Aging is associated with sensory, motor and cognitive impairments that may lead to reduced daily life functioning including gait disturbances, falls, injuries and mobility restrictions. A strong need exists for implementing effective evidence-based interventions for healthy aging. Therefore, the aim of this study was to (i) evaluate the feasibility and usability of an in-home multicomponent exergame training and (ii) explore its effects on physical functions, cognition and cortical activity. Twenty-one healthy and independently living older adults were included (11 female, 74.4 ± 7.0 years, range: 65-92 years) and performed 24 trainings sessions (each 40 min) over eight weeks. The first part was conducted in a living lab (home-like laboratory environment), the second part at participants' home. The multicomponent exergame included Tai Chi-inspired exercises, dance movements and step-based cognitive games to train strength, balance and cognition. Attendance and attrition rates were calculated and safety during training was evaluated to determine feasibility. Participants rated the usability of the exergame (System Usability Scale) and reported on their game experience (Game Experience Questionnaire). Physical and cognitive functions and cortical activity (resting state electroencephalopathy) were assessed pre and post intervention. Results showed a high training attendance rate for the living lab and the home-based setting (91.7 and 91.0%, respectively) with a rather high attrition rate (28.6%, six drop-outs). Half of the drop-out reasons were related to personal or health issues. System usability was rated acceptable with a mean score of 70.6/100. Affective game experience was rated favorable. Significant improvements were found for minimal toe clearance, short-term attentional span, and information processing speed (p < 0.05). No significant pre-post differences were found for cortical activity. To summarize, the exergame is generally feasible and usable for healthy older adults applied in an in-home setting and provides an overall positive emotional game experience. Nevertheless, flawless technical functionality should be a mandatory consideration. Additionally, the training might have potential positive influence on specific functions in older adults. However, the efficacy has to be evaluated in a future randomized controlled trial assessing the behavioral and neuroplastic changes in a larger population after a longer training period.Entities:
Keywords: elderly; exergame; fall prevention; feasibility; healthy aging; usability
Year: 2019 PMID: 31824295 PMCID: PMC6882741 DOI: 10.3389/fnagi.2019.00304
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Aging Neurosci ISSN: 1663-4365 Impact factor: 5.750
FIGURE 1Step-based cognitive training. The Active@Home exergame included step-based exercises to train specific cognitive functions (a task for inhibition training is shown in the picture). By stepping forward, backward, and to the right or left side, these games were played and controlled. The IMUs worn at ankles evaluated the stepping performance.
FIGURE 2Study flow chart. Screening of participants for eligibility included an assessment of cognitive and health state. Physical and cognitive functions as well as brain activity were measured at pre- and post-measurement. Assessments and the first half of the intervention were performed at the living lab of ETH Hönggerberg (Zurich, Switzerland), the second half at participants’ home. Questionnaires assessing usability and game experience were filled in after the training period. Technical drop-out reasons included software problems, unstable IMU connections and inappropriate movement evaluation. Other drop-out reasons were related to injuries, sudden illness and family affairs. SUS, System Usability Scale; GEQ, Game Experience Questionnaire.
Demographic characteristics of participants and screening values.
| Age in years | 74.4 ± 7.0 (65–92) | 80.2 ± 7.1 (70–92) |
| Weight [kg] | 73.2 ± 19.8 (42–120) | 66.0 ± 20.0 (42–95) |
| Height [cm] | 168.0 ± 9.4 (155–187) | 168.0 ± 12.4 (155–187) |
| Education in years | 14.1 ± 4.2 (4–20) | 13.8 ± 6.1 (4–20) |
| MMSE Score | 29.0 ± 1.6 (24–30) | 27.8 ± 2.6 (24–30) |
| Female [n,%] | 11 (52.4) | 2 (33.3) |
| Never | 17 (81.0) | 6 (100.0) |
| Sometimes | 3 (14.3) | 0 (0.0) |
| Often | 1 (4.8) | 0 (0.0) |
| Always | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
| Never | 18 (85.7) | 6 (100.0) |
| Once | 2 (9.5) | 0 (0.0) |
| More than once | 1 (4.8) | 0 (0.0) |
| Very good | 5 (23.8) | 1 (16.7) |
| Good | 12 (57.1) | 2 (33.3) |
| Medium | 4 (19.0) | 3 (50.0) |
| Bad | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
| Very good | 3 (14.3) | 3 (50.0) |
| Good | 9 (42.9) | 1 (16.7) |
| Medium | 7 (33.3) | 2 (33.3) |
| Bad | 2 (9.5) | 0 (0.0) |
| Very good | 2 (9.5) | 1 (16.7) |
| Good | 12 (57.1) | 4 (66.7) |
| Medium | 7 (33.3) | 1 (16.7) |
| Bad | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
FIGURE 3Primary outcome result of game experience. Data shown in the figure are means with standard deviations in each emotional category of the GEQ (n = 17). The two light-gray categories (tension, negative affect) have to be evaluated reversely which means a lower score is favorable. The GEQ ranges from 0 = “not at all” to 4 = “extremly”.
Primary outcome results: summary of usability protocol with supervisors’ observations and participants’ feedback.
| Functionality and interaction with the system | – Simple set up | – Very specific movements/steps needed for step-based cognitive games (specific and strict step detecting algorithm) |
| IMUs | – Comfortable to wear | – Instable IMU connection (via Bluetooth) |
| Design | – Appealing game design | – Virtual instructor could be more motivating (gestures as “thumps up”, comments etc.) |
| Training principles | – Real-time feedback while exercising (auditory and visual, positive and negative) | – Auditory feedback (sounds for “right” and “wrong”) could be louder in relation to background music |
| Exercises | – Clear structure of exercise levels | – Dance steps sometimes not perfectly instructed (difficult to reproduce) |
| Emotions | – Motivation and fun (despite of technical malfunctions) | – Frustration and displeasure because of technical issues and inaccurate evaluation of movements |
Secondary outcome results.
| ST walking | 1.41 (1.32; 1.49) | 1.43 (1.23; 1.55) | −0.454 | 0.679 | 0.08 | |
| Balance score | 7 (6; 7) | 7 (6; 7) | −0.857 | 0.488 | 0.16 | |
| 30 s chair rises test | 15 (13; 20) | 18 (15; 22) | −1.603 | 0.110 | 0.29 | |
| YBT score [%]+ | 76.8 (73.7; 85.2) | 87.1 (73.9; 91.1) | −1.836 | 0.074 | 0.43 | |
| RT auditory [ms] | 624 (577; 675) | 648 (617; 691) | −0.057 | 0.966 | 0.01 | |
| Digit forward task | 6 (6; 8) | 8 (6; 9) | −2.859 | 0.002∗ | 0.52 | |
| Peak alpha frequency [Hz] | 9.3 (8.7; 9.5) | 9.7 (9.0; 9.8) | −1.104 | 0.375 | 0.25 | |
| Alpha spectral power [μV2] | 23.4 (20.1; 39.2) | 27.8 (19.8; 63.9) | −1.955 | 0.055 | 0.44 | |