| Literature DB >> 32773732 |
Su-Yeon Hong1, Young Moon2, Jong-Duk Choi3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND The decreased postural control ability of stroke patients affects their ability to balance in various postures such as sitting and standing. This study aimed to determine whether cognitive task training for stroke patients is effective in improving walking and balancing abilities. MATERIAL AND METHODS Seventeen stroke patients (10 males, 7 females) were randomized by ballot to be assigned to the cognitive task group (CBT) or the general task group (GBT). For the cognitive task training, a dual task of balance and cognition using traffic signals, a familiar form to the subjects, was applied as a program. In both groups the interventions were performed for 30 min a day, 3 times a week, for 4 weeks. The timed up and go test (TUG), the Berg balance scale (BBS), and gait ability evaluation were performed to compare the therapeutic effects. RESULTS After the intervention, the BBS showed significant differences in both groups (p<0.05). The cognitive task training group had significant improvement in all outcome scores after the intervention (p<0.05). The TUG score of the CBT group significantly decreased to 6.17 s (p<0.05), but that of the GBT showed no statistically significant change. CONCLUSIONS Cognitive task training could be used in clinical rehabilitation as a more effective intervention method to improve balance and gait ability of stroke patients.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32773732 PMCID: PMC7439598 DOI: 10.12659/MSMBR.925264
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Med Sci Monit Basic Res ISSN: 2325-4394
Figure 1Cognitive task training program (A: starting position, B: performed without elastic bands, C: performed with elastic bands).
Demographic characteristics of the participants.
| Variable | CBT group (n=8) | GBT group (n=9) | p |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender (Male/Female) | 6/2 | 4/5 | 0.335 |
| Affected side (left/right) | 4/4 | 6/3 | 0.637 |
| Age, mean years±SD | 56.63±8.78 | 66.22±11.55 | 0.075 |
| Height, mean cm±SD | 169.63±7.15 | 162.11±8.07 | 0.062 |
| Weight, mean kg±SD | 67.46±9.50 | 59.23±6.37 | 0.051 |
| Onset duration, mean months±SD | 19±8.38 | 15.33±7.47 | 0.355 |
Mean±standard deviation (SD).
CBT – cognitive balance task training; GBT – general balance task training.
Comparison of balance and gait ability within groups and between groups.
| Variable | CBT group (n=8) | GBT group (n=9) | Between group p-value | Mean change | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-test | Post-test | Within group p-value | Pre-test | Post-test | Within group p-value | CBT group | GBT group | ||
| BBS (score) | 39.75±7.61 | 44.38±6.37 | 0.012 | 34.44±7.20 | 41.56±6.84 | 0.012 | 0.334 | 4.63±3.74 | 5.94±4.56 |
| TUG (s) | 34.64±20.82 | 28.47±15.59 | 0.013 | 30.96±17.11 | 27.81±10.59 | 0.859 | 0.027 | −6.16±7.22 | −3.15±6.52 |
| SV (cm/s) | 37.47±34.11 | 40.47±34.98 | 0.043 | 39.95±20.67 | 40.06±25.60 | 0.066 | 0.501 | 2.72±3.21 | 1.07±0.67 |
| SL (cm) | 54.22±23.52 | 63.46±22.93 | 0.043 | 55.19±21.78 | 62.82±20.88 | 0.260 | 0.923 | 9.24±8.25 | 7.63±16.37 |
| DST (s) | 1.39±0.85 | 1.19±0.69 | 0.046 | 0.80±0.33 | 0.76±.31 | 0.372 | 0.630 | 0.18±0.40 | 0.04±0.14 |
Mean±standard deviation (SD).
Significance of the difference within groups;
significance of the difference between groups.
Pre-test was performed before the intervention, and post-test was performed after 4 weeks. In the pre-test comparison between groups, there was no significant difference (P>0.05). The significance level was set at 0.05 for differences between the 2 groups. CBT – cognitive balance task training; GBT – general balance task training; BBS – Berg balance scale; TUG – timed up and go test; SV – stride velocity; SL – stride length; DST – double support time.