This clinical trial focuses on testing the efficacy of different digital interventions to promote re-engagement in cancer-related long-term follow-up care for adolescent and young adult (AYA) survivors of childhood cancer.
Older adults have difficulty optimizing two tasks at once and typically experience greater interference than younger adults when dual-tasking, meaningful that there is greater decline in performance of at least one task when comparing single and dual-tasking. Difficulty dual-tasking may actually predict falls in community-dwelling older adults. Dual-task training has been shown to improve cognitive outcomes (attention, memory), motor outcomes (balance, gait), and dual-task performance in older adults; however, most dual-task training involves simulated tasks that do not reflect functional dual tasks in the real world. Greater dual-task improvements could be seen when training functionally specific tasks. One way to increase task specificity is to offer real-life, contextually-relevant, dual-task training embedded in instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs). Limited evidence exists for dual-task training interventions for older adults with T2DM; however there is early evidence of improvements in cognitive and motor effects with simulated dual-task training, which could translate to improved dual-task performance, reduced impact on everyday life, and reduced fall risk. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to assess feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a real-life dual-task training program for older adults at risk to fall.
Real-life Dual-Task Training for Older Adults at Risk to Fall
Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.
| Inclusion Criteria | Exclusion Criteria |
|---|---|
|
|
Sponsor: Colorado State University
These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.