Studies have determined that compared to cognitively intact older adults (CIOA), older adults with mild cognitive impairment (OAwMCI) exhibit more pronounced balance and gait impairments which lead to an increased risk of falls and mobility decline. Such impairments are evident during dual-tasking (i.e., simultaneous performance of cognitive and motor task) and OAwMCI have demonstrated an increased cognitive-motor interference (deteriorated performance of either or both cognitive/motor task). Furthermore, our preliminary laboratory findings indicate that compared to CIOA, OAwMCI in response to large-magnitude treadmill perturbations exhibits poor reactive responses (first line of defense against balance loss) and are unable to modulate their responses as the magnitude of perturbation increases. Despite that conventional exercise methods offer beneficial effects; they comprise of self-initiated task-specific exercises and may not focus on training reactive responses. Additionally, due to the presence of subtle balance and gait deficits, clinical measures used may not be sensitive enough to determine the risk of fall post-training. Furthermore, these training methods incorporate multiple sessions due to which adherence to exercise training is difficult with only a fraction of the older adults benefiting from it. Therefore, it is essential to incorporate a task-specific strategy that promotes factors associated with falling like balance control, muscular responses, coordination of limbs, and cognition through which OAwMCI may acquire maximum benefits to prevent a balance loss. One feasible method, which harnesses technology that can be used to deliver balance disturbances either while standing or walking in a consistent and controlled manner, is via a custom-based motorized treadmill. The scientific rigor from preliminary studies has reported a successful reduction of falls through a single session exposing CIOA to multiple treadmill-induced perturbations during gait and has shown significant improvement in reactive responses. For that reason, this stage 1 pilot study will examine the feasibility, applicability, and tolerability of a combined cognitive, and perturbation training on biomechanical determinants associated with falls and promote physical activity: kinematic variables, muscular responses, and cognitive function.
Age range
55 Years
Sex
ALL
See this in plain English?
AI-rewrites the medical criteria so a patient or caregiver can understand them. Always confirm with the trial site.
Bring these to your next appointment. They're a starting point for a shared conversation — not a sign you qualify or a recommendation to enrol.
Generated to help you prepare — always confirm anything about your own eligibility and care with the study team and your doctor.
The trial coordinator is the person who runs the study day to day. These cover the practical side — logistics, costs, and what taking part would actually mean for your life. The study team confirms whether you meet the criteria; these are questions to ask, not a sign you qualify.
A starting point for the conversation — always confirm anything about your own eligibility, costs, and care with the study team and your doctor.
Change in Stability gain or loss
Timeframe: Baseline (1st novel slip, trip week 1), immediate post-training (repeated perturbation training session, week 1) and 4 weeks of training
Change in Limb support gain or loss
Timeframe: Baseline (1st novel slip, trip week 1), immediate post-training (repeated perturbation training session, week 1) and 4 weeks of training
Change in laboratory-induced falls
Timeframe: Baseline (1st novel slip, trip week 1), immediate post-training (repeated perturbation training session, week 1) and 4 weeks of training
Change in postural stability during reactive balance control (single and dual-task) on treadmill slips
Timeframe: Baseline (1st novel slip, trip week 1), immediate post-training (repeated perturbation training session, week 1) and 4 weeks of training
Change in postural stability during reactive balance control (single and dual-task) on overground slips
Timeframe: Baseline (1st novel slip, trip week 1), immediate post-training (repeated perturbation training session, week 1) and 4 weeks of training
Change in walking step length
Timeframe: Baseline (1st novel slip, trip week 1), immediate post-training (repeated perturbation training session, week 1) and 4 weeks of training
Change in walking cadence
Timeframe: Baseline (1st novel slip, trip week 1), immediate post-training (repeated perturbation training session, week 1) and 4 weeks of training
Change in walking stride length
Timeframe: Baseline (1st novel slip, trip week 1), immediate post-training (repeated perturbation training session, week 1) and 4 weeks of training
Change of accuracy in letter number sequencing
Timeframe: Baseline (1st novel slip, trip week 1), immediate post-training (repeated perturbation training session, week 1) and 4 weeks of training
Change in accuracy of Visual clock test
Timeframe: Baseline (1st novel slip, trip week 1), immediate post-training (repeated perturbation training session, week 1) and 4 weeks of training
Change in dual-task cost
Timeframe: Baseline (week 1), immediate post-training (repeated perturbation training session, week 1) and 4 weeks of training
Change in visuomotor task
Timeframe: Baseline (week 1), immediate post-training (repeated perturbation training session, week 1) and 4 weeks of training
Fractional anisotropy
Timeframe: Baseline (week 1)
Gray matter volume
Timeframe: Baseline (week 1)
Functional connectivity Z score
Timeframe: Baseline (week 1)