Comparing the effect of individual and group cognitive-motor training on reconstructing subjective well-being and quality of life in older males, recovered from the COVID-19.

IF 1.7 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Cognitive Processing Pub Date : 2023-08-01 Epub Date: 2023-04-10 DOI:10.1007/s10339-023-01136-2
Amin Amini, Mohammad Vaezmousavi, Hossein Shirvani
{"title":"Comparing the effect of individual and group cognitive-motor training on reconstructing subjective well-being and quality of life in older males, recovered from the COVID-19.","authors":"Amin Amini, Mohammad Vaezmousavi, Hossein Shirvani","doi":"10.1007/s10339-023-01136-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>While the message emanating from physiological and psychological research has extolled the general advantages of exercise in physical and cognitive health, the social distancing and the impossibility of group exercises have revealed more complex conditions. Therefore, we performed an experimental study comparing the effect of individual and group cognitive-motor training on reconstructing subjective well-being (SWB) and quality of life (QOL) in older males who recovered from COVID-19. The study's design is a single-blind, randomized controlled trial (RCT). The participants, 36 older men (65-80 yrs.) recovering from COVID-19, were randomly divided into (1) Group A (cognitive-motor training, G-CMT); (2) Group B (individual cognitive-motor training, I-CMT); and (3) Group C (control). Both training interventions involved performing a training protocol (cognitive-motor training) twice a week for four weeks. The outcomes included an assessment of the SWB and QOL of participants by SWB scale and world health organization QOL scale at baseline and two weeks after interventions. Except for the effect of age and number of children variables on QOL, other demographic variables had no significant effect on the results of SWB or WHOQOL of participants (P > 0.05). The SWB results in G-CMT were better than I-CMT and control groups in emotional and social well-being domains. Also, WHOQOL test results in G-CMT were better than control groups in domains of psychological and social relationships, whereas I-CMT performed better than G-CMT and control groups in domains of cognitive well-being, physical health, and environment. The results revealed that the mean test scores of SWB and WHOQOL in G-CMT and I-CMT were better than the control group (P ≤ 0.001). The positive effects of cognitive-motor training on reconstructing SWB and QOL are associated with the synchronicity of cognitive and motor components in these exercises. We suggest that the emotional, social, and psychological benefits of cognitive-motor training override cognitive, physical, and environmental changes. The future line of the present study will include pathophysiology and further clinical aspect of recovering from COVID-19.</p>","PeriodicalId":47638,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Processing","volume":"24 3","pages":"361-374"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10088645/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Processing","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-023-01136-2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While the message emanating from physiological and psychological research has extolled the general advantages of exercise in physical and cognitive health, the social distancing and the impossibility of group exercises have revealed more complex conditions. Therefore, we performed an experimental study comparing the effect of individual and group cognitive-motor training on reconstructing subjective well-being (SWB) and quality of life (QOL) in older males who recovered from COVID-19. The study's design is a single-blind, randomized controlled trial (RCT). The participants, 36 older men (65-80 yrs.) recovering from COVID-19, were randomly divided into (1) Group A (cognitive-motor training, G-CMT); (2) Group B (individual cognitive-motor training, I-CMT); and (3) Group C (control). Both training interventions involved performing a training protocol (cognitive-motor training) twice a week for four weeks. The outcomes included an assessment of the SWB and QOL of participants by SWB scale and world health organization QOL scale at baseline and two weeks after interventions. Except for the effect of age and number of children variables on QOL, other demographic variables had no significant effect on the results of SWB or WHOQOL of participants (P > 0.05). The SWB results in G-CMT were better than I-CMT and control groups in emotional and social well-being domains. Also, WHOQOL test results in G-CMT were better than control groups in domains of psychological and social relationships, whereas I-CMT performed better than G-CMT and control groups in domains of cognitive well-being, physical health, and environment. The results revealed that the mean test scores of SWB and WHOQOL in G-CMT and I-CMT were better than the control group (P ≤ 0.001). The positive effects of cognitive-motor training on reconstructing SWB and QOL are associated with the synchronicity of cognitive and motor components in these exercises. We suggest that the emotional, social, and psychological benefits of cognitive-motor training override cognitive, physical, and environmental changes. The future line of the present study will include pathophysiology and further clinical aspect of recovering from COVID-19.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
比较个体和群体认知运动训练对新冠肺炎康复的老年男性重建主观幸福感和生活质量的影响。
虽然生理和心理研究发出的信息赞扬了锻炼在身体和认知健康方面的普遍优势,但社交距离和不可能进行集体锻炼揭示了更复杂的情况。因此,我们进行了一项实验研究,比较了个体和群体认知运动训练对新冠肺炎康复的老年男性重建主观幸福感(SWB)和生活质量(QOL)的影响。该研究的设计是一项单盲随机对照试验(RCT)。参与者,36名从新冠肺炎中康复的老年男性(65-80岁),被随机分为(1)A组(认知运动训练,G-CMT);(2) B组(个体认知运动训练,I-CMT);(3)C组(对照组)。两种训练干预措施都包括每周进行两次为期四周的训练方案(认知运动训练)。结果包括在基线和干预后两周通过SWB量表和世界卫生组织生活质量量表对参与者的SWB和生活质量进行评估。除了年龄和儿童数量变量对生活质量的影响外,其他人口学变量对参与者的SWB或WHOQOL结果没有显著影响(P > 0.05)。G-CMT的SWB结果在情绪和社会幸福领域优于I-CMT和对照组。此外,G-CMT的WHOQOL测试结果在心理和社会关系领域优于对照组,而I-CMT在认知幸福、身体健康和环境领域优于G-CMT和对照组。结果表明,G-CMT组和I-CMT组SWB和WHOQOL的平均测试成绩均优于对照组(P ≤ 0.001)。认知运动训练对重建主观幸福感和生活质量的积极影响与这些训练中认知和运动成分的同步性有关。我们认为,认知运动训练的情感、社会和心理益处超过了认知、身体和环境的变化。本研究的未来方向将包括新冠肺炎康复的病理生理学和进一步的临床方面。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cognitive Processing
Cognitive Processing PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
5.90%
发文量
44
期刊介绍: Cognitive Processing - International Quarterly of Cognitive Science is a peer-reviewed international journal that publishes innovative contributions in the multidisciplinary field of cognitive science.  Its main purpose is to stimulate research and scientific interaction through communication between specialists in different fields on topics of common interest and to promote an interdisciplinary understanding of the diverse topics in contemporary cognitive science. Cognitive Processing is articulated in the following sections:Cognitive DevelopmentCognitive Models of Risk and Decision MakingCognitive NeuroscienceCognitive PsychologyComputational Cognitive SciencesPhilosophy of MindNeuroimaging and Electrophysiological MethodsPsycholinguistics and Computational linguisticsQuantitative Psychology and Formal Theories in Cognitive ScienceSocial Cognition and Cognitive Science of Culture
期刊最新文献
Online level-2 perspective taking for newly learnt symbols. Be kind, don't rewind: trait rumination may hinder the effects of self-compassion on health behavioral intentions after a body image threat. Analysis of the impact of different background colors in VR environments on risk preferences. Decision-making during training of a Swedish navy command and control team: a quantitative study of workload effects. Navigating space: how fine and gross motor expertise influence spatial abilities at different scales.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1