Cognitive-Postural Multitasking Training in Older Adults - Effects of Input-Output Modality Mappings on Cognitive Performance and Postural Control.

Markus Brahms,Christine Stelzel,Michael Rapp,Urs Granacher,Gesche Schauenburg,Stephan Heinzel,Volker Reisner,Jérôme Rimpel,Gunnar Wahmkow

doi:10.5334/joc.146

Abstract

Older adults exhibit impaired cognitive and balance performance, particularly under multi-task conditions, which can be improved through training. Compatibility of modality mappings in cognitive tasks (i.e., match between stimulus modality and anticipated sensory effects of motor responses), modulates physical and cognitive dual-task costs. However, the effects of modality specific training programs have not been evaluated yet. Here, we tested the effects of cognitive-postural multi-tasking training on the ability to coordinate task mappings under high postural demands in healthy older adults. Twenty-one adults aged 65–85 years were assigned to one of two groups. While group 1 performed cognitive-postural triple-task training with compatible modality mappings (i.e., visual-manual and auditory-vocal dual n-back tasks), group 2 performed the same tasks with incompatible modality mappings (i.e., visual-vocal and auditory-manual n-back tasks). Throughout the 6-weeks balance training intervention, working-memory load was gradually increased while base-of-support was reduced. Before training (T0), after a 6-week passive control period (T1), and immediately after the intervention (T2), participants performed spatial dual one-back tasks in semi-tandem stance position. Our results indicate improved working-memory performance and reduced dual-task costs for both groups after the passive control period, but no training-specific performance gains. Furthermore, balance performance did not improve in response to training. Notably, the cohort demonstrated meaningful interindividual variability in training responses. Our findings raise questions about practice effects and age-related heterogeneity of training responses following cognitive-motor training. Following multi-modal balance training, neither compatible nor incompatible modality mappings had an impact on the observed outcomes.

Highlights

Older adults were recruited via newspaper advertisements in Potsdam and Berlin, Germany for a large-scale study involving electroencephalographic (EEG) and functional magnetic resonance imaging measurements (Bohle et al, 2019; Stelzel et al, 2018)
Eligibility for the functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study was determined separately based on the rules and safety guidelines of the Berlin Center for Advanced Neuroimaging (BCAN)
In an effort to explore the association between participants’ neuropsychological status and the outcomes of the training intervention, we reduced the dataset by entering six neuropsychological tests (LPS, TMT-A, Trail TMT-B, Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST), DTA-A, DST-B) assessed at baseline (Table 1) into a principal component analysis (PCA) with Kaiser-normalized Varimax rotation

Summary

Introduction

We systematically manipulated working memory load by comparing cognitive single vs dual one-back working-memory tasks and control demands in a continuous cognitive working-memory task, performed concurrently with a postural task on a force plate. Previous studies have consistently shown increased cognitive performance costs for modality incompatible mappings (e.g., visual-vocal and auditory-manual) compared to modality compatible mappings (e.g., visual-manual and auditory-vocal). These modalityspecific costs for correctly assigning stimuli to required responses were shown in dual-task paradigms involving task-set switching or concurrent task performance (Fintor, Stephan, & Koch, 2018; Göthe, Oberauer, & Kliegl, 2016; Stephan & Koch, 2010)

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion