How does a 4-week motor-cognitive training affect choice reaction, dynamic balance and cognitive performance ability? A randomized controlled trial in well-trained, young, healthy participants

Effects of 6-Week Motor-Cognitive Agility Training on Football Test Performance in Adult Amateur Players - A Three-Armed Randomized Controlled Trial

Agility, defined as the ability to rapidly respond to unforeseen events, constitutes a central performance component in football. Existing agility training approaches often focus on change of direction that does not reflect the complex motor-cognitive demands on the pitch. The objective of this study is to examine the effects of a novel motor-cognitive dual-task agility training (Multiple-object tracking integrated into agility training) on agility and football-specific test performance parameters, compared to agility and a change of direction (COD) training. Adult male amateur football players (n = 42; age: 27±6; height: 181±7cm; weight: 80±12kg) were randomly allocated to one of the three intervention groups (COD, agility, agility + multiple object tracking). The Loughborough Soccer Passing Test (LSPT), a dribbling test with/without cognitive task as well as the Random Star Run (with/without ball) and the modified T-Test were assessed before and after a 6-week training period. Time effects within the T-Test (F = 83.9; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.68) and dribbling test without cognitive task (F = 23.9; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.38) with improvements of all intervention groups (p < 0.05) were found. Dribbling with cognitive task revealed a time effect (F = 7.8; p = 0.008; η2 = 0.17), with improvements exclusively in the agility and dual-task agility groups (p < 0.05). Random Star Run with and without ball exhibited a time (F = 38.8; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.5; F = 82.7; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.68) and interaction effect (F = 14.14; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.42; F = 27.8; p < 0.001; η2 = 0.59), with improvements for the agility and dual-task agility groups. LSPT showed no time, group or interaction effect. The effects of change of direction training are limited to change of direction and dribbling test performance within preplanned scenarios. In contrast, motor-cognitive agility interventions result in notable enhancements in football-specific and agility tests, incorporating decision-making and multitasking components. No differences were observed between agility and agility + multiple object tracking. To achieve a transfer to game-relevant performance, coaches should focus on integrating cognitive challenges into motor training.

Immediate and short-term effects of single-task and motor-cognitive dual-task on executive function

OBJECTIVES

Executive function plays an important role in our daily life and can be affected by both single task (acute aerobic exercise or cognitive training) and dual-task (acute motor-cognitive training) interventions. Here we explored the immediate and short-term effect on executive function to texted whether dual-task interventions are more effective at promoting executive function.

METHODS

Forty-six young men were recruited (mean age: 20.65 years) and assigned randomly to aerobic exercise (n = 15), cognitive training (n = 15), or dual-task (n = 16) groups. Executive functions were assessed before, immediately after, and 30 min after intervention using Go/No-go, 2-back, and More-Odd-Shifting tests.

RESULTS

Working memory function improved after all three interventions (significant Time effect, F(2,86) = 7.05, p = 0.001). Performance on the 2-back test was significantly better immediately after dual-task intervention (p = 0.038) and the response time was shorter (p = 0.023). Performance on the More-Odd-Shifting test improved over time (significant Time effect, F(2,86) = 30.698, p = 0.01), both immediately after the dual-task intervention (p = 0.015), and 30 min later (p = 0.001). Shifting-test performance was also better immediately after (p = 0.005) and 30 min after (p < 0.001) aerobic exercise.

CONCLUSION

Executive function was enhanced by single-task (acute aerobic exercise or cognitive training) and dual-task interventions. The effect continued for 30 min after both the single-task aerobic exercise and the dual-task intervention. For short-term intervention, the dual-task was not more effective than either of the single tasks.

Does the combination of exercise and cognitive training improve working memory in older adults? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Cognitive functioning is dependent on working memory and a decline in working memory is the main cause of cognitive aging. Many studies have suggested that physical exercise or cognitive intervention can effectively improve working memory in the elderly. However, it is still unknown whether a combination of exercise and cognitive training (CECT) is more effective than either intervention alone. The present systematic review and meta-analysis were undertaken to evaluate the effect of CECT on working memory in the elderly.

Methods

The review was registered in the International Prospective Systematic Review (PROSPERO, CRD42021290138). Systematic searches were conducted on Web of Science, Elsevier Science, PubMed and Google Scholar. The data were extracted according to the PICOS framework. Comprehensive meta-analysis (CMA) software was used to perform the meta-analysis, moderator analysis and publication bias testing.

Results

The current meta-analysis included 21 randomized controlled trials (RCT). Results showed that CECT had a significantly greater impact on working memory in older adults compared to no intervention groups (SMD = 0.29, 95% CI [0.14-0.44], p < 0.01), with no significant difference between CECT and exercise (SMD = 0.16, 95% CI [-0.04-0.35], p = 0.12) or cognitive intervention alone (SMD = 0.08, 95% CI [-0.13-0.30], p = 0.44). Furthermore, the positive effect of CECT was moderated by intervention frequency and cognitive state.

Conclusions

The CECT can effectively improve working memory of older adults, but the effect of CECT compared to single intervention needs to be further explored.

Integrating neurocognitive challenges into injury prevention training: A clinical commentary

Despite the efforts of many traditional lower extremity injury prevention programs (IPP), the incidence of anterior cruciate ligament injuries in young athletes continues to rise. Current best practices for IPPs include training lower extremity neuromuscular control and movement quality during cutting, jumping, and pivoting. Emerging evidence indicates neurocognition may contribute to injury incidence and injury risk biomechanics. Therefore, IPP outcomes may improve if clinicians also consider neurocognitive contributions to neuromuscular control and athletic performance. A substantial barrier to neurocognitive challenge integration during injury prevention training in the group setting is the lack of structured neuromuscular and neurocognitive progressions. Therefore, our aim is to provide clinicians with a defined framework and recommendations from clinical experience for how to implement neurocognitive challenges within group IPPs that requires minimal extra time and resources. This clinical commentary proposes a three-phase model adopted from motor learning literature to simultaneously progress neuromuscular and neurocognitive challenges through a structured IPP.