| Literature DB >> 32210785 |
Felipe de Oliveira Matos1, Amanda Vido1, William Fernando Garcia1, Wendell Arthur Lopes1, Antonio Pereira2.
Abstract
The association between physical fitness and cognitive performance has been widely investigated in the literature. However, the neurophysiological mechanisms underlying this relationship are not yet clear. Here, we aim to evaluate the interactions between executive function measures, heart rate variability (HRV), and physical fitness in the context of the neurovisceral integration (NVI) theory. Twenty-eight healthy elderly subjects (>60 years) were submitted to evaluation of executive performance with three computerized tests: the N-back test measured working memory capacity, the Stroop Color test evaluated inhibitory control and selective attention, and the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST) evaluated abstract reasoning and cognitive flexibility. We also used the Physical Testing Battery for the Elderly to measure aerobic capacity, dynamic balance, upper body flexibility, and handgrip strength. Our results confirm the relationship between executive function and physical fitness, particularly between working memory, cardiorespiratory fitness, and dynamic balance. We also demonstrate an association between executive performance and HRV in older people, corroborating previous results from other groups obtained in young adults. However, our regression models did not indicate that HRV mediates the relationship between cognition and physical fitness in the elderly, suggesting that age-related degeneration of autonomic control can affect aspects of NVI in this population.Entities:
Keywords: aging; autonomic nervous system; cognition; executive functions; heart rate variability; physical fitness; working memory
Year: 2020 PMID: 32210785 PMCID: PMC7068733 DOI: 10.3389/fnagi.2020.00051
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Aging Neurosci ISSN: 1663-4365 Impact factor: 5.750
Descriptive values of cognitive performance, heart rate variability (HRV), and fitness.
| Mean (±SD) | Median | Minimum | Maximum | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean HR | 78.18 (9.12) | 77.50 | 59 | 98 |
| Mean RR | 777.21 (94.43) | 772 | 613 | 1018 |
| SDNN | 17.94 (16.22) | 12.55 | 7.8 | 81.5 |
| RMSSD | 21.16 (26.12) | 13.55 | 4.6 | 116.8 |
| LF (%) | 49.62 (17.31) | 53.15 | 10.10 | 77.45 |
| LF (n.u.) | 55.84 (20.13) | 58.68 | 10.14 | 92.70 |
| HF (%) | 40.01 (20.02) | 33.14 | 5.54 | 89.14 |
| HF (n.u.) | 43.82 (19.96) | 39.86 | 7.26 | 89.49 |
| Total Power | 394.29 (906.52) | 119.50 | 30 | 4781 |
| LF/HF | 2.06 (2.44) | 1.48 | 0.113 | 12.77 |
| SD1 | 14.99 (18.49) | 9.55 | 3.3 | 82.7 |
| SD2 | 19.76 (14.71) | 15.700 | 8.0 | 80.4 |
| SD1/SD2 | 1.77 (0.77) | 1.70 | 0.68 | 3.98 |
| 6MWT (m) | 504.11 (78.7) | 497.5 | 350 | 675 |
| TUG (ms) | 7,371.4 (2244.9) | 6,595 | 4,970 | 15,600 |
| Strength (Kg/f) | 25.71 (8.7) | 24 | 14 | 47 |
| Flexibility (cm) | 3.8 (9.7) | 5.7 | −22 | 18 |
| Hits 2-back | 49.02 (21.9) | 47.10 | 0.0 | 82.4 |
| Hits N-back | 67.75 (13.5) | 70.60 | 44.1 | 91.2 |
| Miss N-back | 16.65 (8.4) | 15.80 | 2.5 | 37.5 |
| latency C_A (ms) | 8,414.99 (22,329.81) | 1,100.4 | −8,838.3 | 84,365.6 |
| latency C_B (ms) | 1,538.90 (7414.47) | −69.0 | −14,215.3 | 26,546.8 |
| latency RT C_A (ms) | 98.90 (223.83) | 62.9 | −248.9 | 910.8 |
| latency RT C_B (ms) | 101.86 (243.77) | 47.6 | −110.8 | 1,109.0 |
| Miss | 31.26 (7.52) | 31.00 | 15 | 52 |
| Perseverative Miss | 9.59 (3.70) | 10.00 | 4 | 16 |
Correlations between HRV and cognitive parameters.
| Mean HR | Mean RR | SDNN | RMSSD | LF (%) | LF (n.u.) | HF (%) | HF (n.u.) | Total power | LF/HF | SD1 | SD2 | SD2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hit 2-back | −0.050 | 0.075 | −0.023 | 0.082 | −0.026 | 0.019 | −0.022 | −0.022 | −0.070 | −0.037 | 0.085 | −0.087 | −0.101 |
| Hit N-back | −0.115 | 0.128 | 0.070 | 0.132 | −0.090 | −0.016 | −0.009 | 0.016 | 0.004 | −0.094 | 0.132 | −0.019 | −0.117 |
| Miss N-back | 0.406* | −0.383* | 0.123 | 0.246 | −0.204 | −0.250 | 0.258 | 0.255 | 0.012 | −0.256 | 0.248 | 0.010 | −0.189 |
| Latency C_A | 0.153 | −0.118 | 0.264 | 0.130 | 0.024 | −0.027 | 0.054 | 0.031 | 0.182 | −0.022 | 0.124 | 0.217 | 0.009 |
| Latency C_B | −0.166 | 0.164 | 0.082 | 0.296 | −0.052 | −0.125 | 0.165 | 0.131 | −0.018 | −0.123 | 0.292 | −0.050 | −0.242 |
| Latency RT C_A | −0.207 | 0.218 | 0.217 | 0.193 | −0.008 | −0.051 | 0.065 | 0.050 | 0.129 | −0.045 | 0.188 | 0.142 | −0.070 |
| Latency RT C_B | −0.244 | 0.244 | 0.137 | 0.285 | −0.037 | −0.071 | 0.106 | 0.080 | −0.069 | −0.071 | 0.283 | 0.008 | −0.226 |
| Misses | 0.109 | −0.095 | 0.277 | 0.476* | −0.302 | −0.386* | 0.426* | 0.389* | 0.229 | −0.379 | 0.473* | 0.127 | −0.465* |
| Perseverative Misses | 0.106 | −0.103 | 0.067 | 0.229 | −0.095 | −0.175 | 0.209 | 0.170 | 0.074 | −0.192 | 0.228 | 0.011 | −0.340 |
*p < 0.05.
Figure 1Correlations between working memory, aerobic capacity, and dynamic balance. (A) Hits in 2-back level and walk, (B) total hits in N-back test and walk, (C) misses in N-back and walk, (D) total hits in N-back test and TUG, and (E) misses in N-back and walk.
Correlation between HRV and physical parameters.
| 6MWT | TUG | Strength | Flexibility | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean HR | −0.198 | 0.018 | −0.173 | 0.071 |
| Mean RR | 0.215 | −0.014 | 0.172 | −0.099 |
| SDNN | 0.058 | 0.068 | −0.301 | 0.058 |
| RMSSD | 0.148 | 0.130 | −0.227 | 0.148 |
| LF (%) | −0.027 | −0.044 | −0.134 | 0.151 |
| LF (n.u.) | −0.057 | −0.012 | −0.121 | 0.044 |
| HF (%) | 0.090 | −0.007 | 0.097 | −0.018 |
| HF (n.u.) | 0.058 | 0.025 | 0.119 | −0.043 |
| Total power | 0.025 | −0.014 | −0.153 | 0.018 |
| LF/HF | −0.074 | −0.015 | −0.118 | 0.069 |
| SD1 | 0.157 | 0.123 | −0.218 | 0.138 |
| SD2 | 0.031 | −0.003 | −0.231 | −0.054 |
| SD1/SD2 | −0.164 | 0.054 | 0.063 | −0.150 |
no correlation was statistically significant.
Impact analysis, change statistics and analysis of variance for models involving mean HR and cognition.
| Change statistics | ANOVA | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Models | |||||||
| 0.406 | 0.165 | 0.165 | 5.144 | 0.032* | 5.144 | 0.032* | |
| 0.530 | 0.281 | 0.116 | 4.039 | 0.049* | 4.892 | 0.016* | |
*Model 1: mean HR (dependent variable) × Miss Nback (independent variable). *Model 2: mean HR (dependent variable) × Miss Nback Latency C-A (independent variable). .
Regression coefficient for models involving mean HR variability and cognition variables.
| Collinearity | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Models | Std.Coeff. | Tolerance | VIF | ||
| 1 | |||||
| Miss Nback | 0.406 | 2.268 | 0.032* | 1.000 | 1.000 |
| 2 | |||||
| Miss Nback | 0.496 | 2.838 | 0.009* | 0.936 | 1.096 |
| Latency C-A | 0.352 | 2.010 | 0.049* | 0.936 | 1.069 |
*Model 1: mean HR (dependent variable) × Miss Nback (independent variable). *Model 2: mean HR (dependent variable) × Miss Nback Latency C-A (independent variable). .
Impact analysis, change statistics and analysis of variance for the model involving miss N-back and mean RR.
| Change statistics | ANOVA | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | |||||||
| 1 | 0.383 | 0.147 | 0.147 | 4.472 | 0.044* | 4.472 | 0.044* |
*Model 1: mean_RR (dependent variable) × Miss Nback (independent variable). .
Regression coefficient for the model involving miss N-back and mean RR.
| Cofllinearity | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | Std.Coeff. | tolerance | VIF | ||
| 1 | |||||
| Miss N-back | −0.383 | −2.115 | 0.044* | 1.000 | 1.000 |
*Model 1: mean HR (dependent variable) × Miss N-back (independent variable). .