Motor learning declines with aging, such that older adults retain less motor skill after practice compared to younger adults. However, it remains unclear if these motor learning declines are related to normal cognitive changes associated with aging. The purpose of this study was to examine which cognitive domains would best predict the amount of retention on a motor task one week after training in cognitively intact older adults. Twenty-one adults ages 65-84 years old were assessed with Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status, which assesses five cognitive domains (immediate and delayed memory, visuospatial/constructional, language, and attention). Participants also completed one training session of a functional upper extremity task, and were re-tested one week later. Stepwise regression indicated that the visuospatial domain was the only significant predictor of how much skill participants retained over one week, with a visual perception subtest explaining the most variance. Results from this study support previous work reporting that older adults' capacity for motor learning can be probed with visuospatial tests. These tests may capture the structural or functional health of neural networks critical for skill learning within the aging brain, and provide valuable clinical insight about an individual's unique rehabilitation potential.

Point-to-point reaching has been widely used to study upper extremity motor control. We have been developing a naturalistic reaching task that adds tool manipulation and object transport to this established paradigm. The purpose of this study was to determine the concurrent validity of a naturalistic reaching task in a sample of healthy adults. This task was compared to the criterion measure of standard point-to-point reaching. Twenty-eight adults performed unconstrained out-and-back movements in three different directions relative to constant start location along midline using their nondominant arm. In the naturalistic task, participants manipulated a tool to transport objects sequentially between physical targets anchored to the planar workspace. In the standard task, participants moved a digital cursor sequentially between virtual targets, veridical to the planar workspace. In both tasks, the primary measure of performance was trial time, which indicated the time to complete 15 reaches (five cycles of three reaches/target). Two other comparator tasks were also designed to test concurrent validity when components of the naturalistic task were added to the standard task. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients indicated minimal relationship between the naturalistic and standard tasks due to differences in progressive task difficulty. Accounting for this yielded a moderate linear relationship, indicating concurrent validity. The comparator tasks were also related to both the standard and naturalistic task. Thus, the principles of motor control and learning that have been established by the wealth of point-to-point reaching studies can still be applied to the naturalistic task to a certain extent.

No abstract

Background: Age-related declines in function can limit older adults' independence with activities of daily living (ADLs). While task-specific training maybe a viable approach to improve function, limited clinical resources prevent extensive training on wide ranges of skills and contexts. Thus, training on one task for the benefit of another (i.e., transfer) is important in geriatric physical rehabilitation. The purpose of this study was to test whether motor transfer would occur between two functionally different upper extremity tasks that simulate ADLs in a sample of older adults following task-specific training. Methods: Ninety community dwelling adults ages 43 to 94 years old performed two trials of a functional dexterity and functional reaching task at baseline, and were then assigned to one of two groups. The training group completed three days of task-specific training (150 trials) on the functional reaching task, whereas the no-training group received no training on either task. Both groups were re-tested on both tasks at the end of Day 3. Results: No significant interactions were observed between group (training vs. no-training) and time (baseline vs. re-test) on the functional dexterity task (i.e. transfer task), indicating no difference in the average amount of change from baseline to re-test between the groups. However, post hoc bivariate linear regression revealed an effect of age on motor transfer within the training group. For those who trained on the functional reaching task, the amount of transfer to the dexterity task was inversely related to age. There was no significant relationship between age and motor transfer for the no-training group. Discussion and Conclusions: Results of our a priori group analysis suggest that functional reaching training did not, on average, transfer to the dexterity task. However, post hoc regression

No abstract