Memory complaint (MC) is common in older adults and can be confirmed by people close to them, such as family members and caregivers. Studies show an association between MC and cognitive impairment and, hence, physical vulnerability may exacerbate MC. However, the relationship between MC and physical vulnerability is not yet clear in the literature.\ Objective: to investigate the association between MC, cognitive impairment, and physical vulnerability. Methods: this is a cross-sectional study. We evaluated 100 older adults with a mean age of 65 years or over. The Memory Complaint Scale (MCS), Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised (ACE-R), Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Vulnerable Elderly Research-13 (VES-13), Geriatric Depression Scale and a sociodemographic questionnaire were applied. Results: participants were divided into two groups according to results on the MCS-A (elderly) and MCS-B (informant). Correlations were found between the MCS-A and the MMSE (p=.045/ρ=.201), ACE-R/Visual-Spatial (p=.048/ρ=.199), and ACE-R/Attention-Orientation (p=.026/ρ=.223). For the MCS-B, correlations were found with total score on the ACE-R (p=.044/ρ=-.202) and the ACE-R/Visual-Spatial (p=0.003/ρ=-.291). Conclusion: MC reported by the informant indicate the need to assess, in more depth, the cognition of the older adult. Thus, for clinical practice, screening of MC through an informant is advised.
Background: Combined (CT) and multicomponent training (MT) presents several benefits for aging individuals. However, the literature does not provide evidence on which of the two physical training models can better enhance improvements in physical capacity and health parameters in middle-aged and older women. Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of MT and CT on physical capacity, cognitive, behavioral, and psychosocial assessment, and biochemical profile of physically inactive women aged between 50 and 70 years. Methods: Participants were randomized into two groups: MT (32 women, 64.2 ± 6.4 years) and CT (39 women, 61.4 ± 4.3 years). Both training sessions had a weekly volume of 180 min, for 14 weeks, with assessments at baseline and after the training period. Results: CT showed better results when compared to MT. In the four evaluation blocks, we noticed differences in the effect size (L = large, M = moderate, S = small, and T = trivial) between the groups in 26 variables in total, highlighting the CT group (L = 11, M = 5, S = 2, and T = 8) compared to the MT group (L = 8, M = 7, S = 7, and T = 4). Our findings showed group-time differences for strength variables using the maximum dynamic repetition test in upper and lower limbs and for agility. The multicomponent training showed improvement in the functional strength of the upper limbs evaluated through the elbow flexion and extension test (p = 0.037), and HDL (p = 0.022). Conclusions: Fourteen weeks of CT showed better benefits when compared to MT.
The authors investigated whether impaired gait and dual-task performances are associated with specific cognitive domains among older people with preserved cognition (PC), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and mild Alzheimer's disease (AD). The sample comprised 40 older adults with PC, 40 with MCI, and 38 with mild AD. The assessment consisted of gait (measured by 10-m walk test and Timed Up and Go Test [TUGT]), dual task (measured by TUGT associated with a cognitive-motor task of calling a phone number), and cognition (domains of the Addenbrooke Cognitive Examination-Revised and Frontal Assessment Battery [FAB]). For data analysis, the Pearson product-moment correlation and the backward stepwise linear regression were conducted. Language, fluency, and visuospatial domains predicted the 10-m walk test measure specifically in PC, MCI, and AD groups. Only the visuospatial domain was independently associated with the TUGT measure in the MCI and AD groups. FAB score, language domain, and FAB score and fluency domain were the strongest predictors for the isolated cognitive-motor task measure in the PC, MCI, and AD groups, respectively. The visuospatial domain was independently associated with the dual-task test measure in all 3 groups. The study findings demonstrate the influence of specific cognitive domains in daily mobility tasks in people with different cognitive profiles.
Background: Multicomponent training has considerable adherence among older populations, but there is a lack of literature on the benefits of this training on older people’s posture. Literature also lacks stretching protocols that work the body in an integrated/unified way and respect the principle of individuality in exercise training. We evaluated the effect of a multicomponent training protocol combined or not with flexibility training in improving the posture and quality of movement in physically inactive older women, according to a score lower than 9.11 in the Modified Baecke Questionnaire for the Elderly (MBQE). Methods: 142 participants were evaluated and randomized in three training groups: multicomponent training (MT = 52), multicomponent and flexibility training (MFT = 43), and a control group (CG = 47). We evaluated joint amplitude using goniometry, flexibility with sit and reach and hands behind the back tests, quality of movement with the functional movement screen, and posture using biophotogammetry. Results: The MFT group had 15 parameters—flexibility and posture—with a very large effect size (ES > 1.30) and nine with average ES (0.50–0.79). MT presented two variables with large ES (0.80–1.25) and seven with average ES. CG presented three variables with high ES and five with average ES. Both interventions improved the quality of movement. Conclusions: These results demonstrate that 14 weeks of multicomponent and flexibility training in a group intervention can improve flexibility and posture levels in physically inactive older women.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.