SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Unexpected dual task benefits on cycling in Parkinson disease and healthy adults: a neuro-behavioral model.

PLoS One · 2015-05-13

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0125470PMID: 25970607

Open accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; research-article; Journal Article; Research Support, N.I.H., ExtramuralOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

BackgroundWhen performing two tasks at once, a dual task, performance on one or both tasks typically suffers. People with Parkinson's disease (PD) usually experience larger dual task decrements on motor tasks than healthy older adults (HOA). Our objective was to investigate the decrements in cycling caused by performing cognitive tasks with a range of difficulty in people with PD and HOAs.MethodsTwenty-eight participants with Parkinson's disease and 20 healthy older adults completed a baseline cycling task with no secondary tasks and then completed dual task cycling while performing 12 tasks from six cognitive domains representing a wide range of difficulty.ResultsCycling was faster during dual task conditions than at baseline, and was significantly faster for six tasks (all pConclusionsUnexpectedly, participants' motor performance improved during cognitive dual tasks, which cannot be explained in current models of dual task performance. To account for these findings, we propose a model integrating dual task and acute exercise approaches which posits that cognitive arousal during dual tasks increases resources to facilitate motor and cognitive performance, which is subsequently modulated by motor and cognitive task difficulty. This model can explain both the improvement observed on dual tasks in the current study and more typical dual task findings in other studies.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.