Comparison of Cognitive and Motor Dual Task Performance in Individuals With Prediabetes and Diabetes
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Detailed Description
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Anticipated)
Enrollment
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
Study Contact
- Name: Gizem GM MERMERKAYA
- Phone Number: +905455850238
- Email: gizmyagiz@gmail.com
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Sampling Method
Study Population
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- be 65 years or older
- Being diagnosed with type 2 diabetes or prediabetes
- Volunteer to participate in the study
- Ability to participate in tests independently
- Getting a score of 24 or higher on the Mini Mental State Test
- Being literate
- Being able to communicate
Exclusion Criteria:
- Cancer patients known to be life-threatening
- Severe respiratory, central, vascular, peripheral and uncontrolled metabolic problems
- Using drugs known to affect the postural control system (eg benzodiazepines)
- Those with peripheral neuropathy
- Those with severe hearing and visual impairments
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Observational Models: Other
- Time Perspectives: Cross-Sectional
Number of groups / cohorts
Cohorts and Interventions
Group / CohortGroup / Cohort |
|---|
|
prediabetes
|
|
diabetes
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Timed Get Up and Go Test-Motor and Cognitive Task:
Time Frame: 15 minutes
|
The timed up-and-go test is a widely used clinical test to evaluate balance and mobility.
The clinical benefit of the test is that it can monitor transitions that require balance control, and mobility skills such as sitting up and walking straight.
As the primary task, the participant stands up with the command "Start" from a 46cm standard height chair and walks 3 meters, then turns 180⁰ back and sits on the chair.
As a secondary task, he is asked to carry a standardized glass of water without spilling it during the test.
As a cognitive task, the participant stands up with the "Start" command from a 46cm standard height chair as the primary task and walks 3 meters, then turns 180⁰ back and sits on the chair.
As a secondary task, he is asked to count backwards from 100 by sevens during the test.
He will be allowed to practice cognitively in his seat before starting the test.
The time elapsed during the test will be recorded.
|
15 minutes
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Short Physical Performance Battery:
Time Frame: 10 minutes
|
The Brief Physical Performance Battery is a test used to summarize physical performance based on lower extremity performance, used in populations designated for epidemiological studies of the elderly.
It consists of 3 objective tests evaluating lower body function.
These; It is a 4 meter walking, standing and standing balance test.
|
10 minutes
|
|
Muscle Strength Measurement
Time Frame: 5 minutes
|
Muscle strength will be assessed by hand grip strength for the upper extremity.
Individuals' standard grip strength will be measured with a Jamar hand dynamometer (Baseline Evaluation System, New York, USA).
The measurement will be made in the test position standardized by the American Association of Hand Therapists, with the patient sitting upright in a chair without arm support, with the shoulder in adduction, the elbow in 90° flexion, the forearm in neutral position, the wrist in 0-30° extension and 0-15° ulnar deviation.
While performing the assessment, individuals will be asked to tighten the dynamometer with all their strength and then let it loose completely.
This procedure will be repeated in the dominant hand with 1 minute interval between each measurement and the average of these values will be taken in kg/force.
|
5 minutes
|
|
Mini Mental State Test
Time Frame: 10 minutes
|
Mini Mental State Test (MMDT) was used in our study for cognitive status assessment.
MMDT was first described by Folstein et al. (23) in 1975.
The scale was produced as a cognitive assessment tool that can be applied in a short time in the examination of the elderly.
The scale has limited specificity for distinguishing clinical syndromes; however, it is a short, useful, valid and standardized method that can be used to evaluate the cognitive level in general.
|
10 minutes
|
|
Fatigue Assessment
Time Frame: 2 minutes
|
Fatigue was assessed with the Visual Analog Scale (VAS).
VAS, "Are you tired?"
It was used to determine the severity of fatigue in elderly individuals who answered yes to the question.
VAS is a simple to use, effective, validity and reliability measurement scale (22).
In order to determine their fatigue, individuals will be asked to mark the severity of fatigue on a 10 cm scale where the numbers "0" (no fatigue) and "10" (I am unbearably tired) are shown.
|
2 minutes
|
|
Pain Assessment
Time Frame: 2 minutes
|
Pain was assessed with the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS).
VAS, "Do you have pain?"
It was used to determine the severity of pain in elderly individuals who answered yes to the question.
VAS is a simple to use, effective, validity and reliability measurement scale (21).
Individuals will be asked to mark the severity of pain on a 10 cm scale where the numbers "0" (no pain) and "10" (unbearable pain) are displayed to determine body pain.
|
2 minutes
|
|
Biochemical Analysis
Time Frame: 15 minutes
|
The most up-to-date results of blood test results given by individuals within a maximum of 6 months will be recorded by looking at the system.
Results of fasting glucose levels, total cholesterol, triglyceride, LDL-cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol, hemoglobin values, urea, creatinine levels of individuals in the research group will be recorded.
|
15 minutes
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- 1. World health Organization (WHO), Diabetes Fact Sheet. Updated October 30th 2018. 2. Zhou B, Lu Y, Hajifathalian K,et al. Worldwide trends in dia- betes since 1980: a pooled analysis of 751 population-based studies with 4.4 million participants. Lancet 2016; 387(10027): .1513-30. 3. Chatterjee S, Peters SAE, Woodward M, Mejia Arango SM, Batty D, Beckett N, et al. Type 2 diabetes as a risk factor for dementia in women compared with men: A pooled analysis of 2.3 million people comprising more than 100,000 cases of dementia. Diabetes Care. 2016. February; 39(2): 300-307. 4. Reyes-García R., Moreno-Pérez Ó., Tejera-Pérez C., Fernández-García D., Bellido-Castañeda V., López de la Torre Casares M., Rozas-Moreno P., Fernández-García J.C., Marco Martínez A., Escalada-San Martín J., et al. A comprehensive approach to type 2 diabetes mellitus-A recommendation document. Endocrinol. Diab. Nutric. 2019;66:443-458. doi: 10.1016/j.endinu.2018.10.010. 5. Schlienger J.-L. Complications du diabète de type 2. Presse Med. 2013;42:839-848. doi: 10.1016/j.lpm.2013.02.313. 6. Diabetes Association of the Republic of China (Taiwan) Executive summary of the DAROC clinical practice guidelines for diabetes care-2018. J. Formos. Med. Assoc. 2019 doi: 10.1016/j.jfma.2019.02.016. 7. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National diabetes statistics report: estimates of diabetes and its burden in the United States, 2014. Atlanta: US Department of Health and Human Services; 2014, International Diabetes Federation IDF diabetes atlas 2015. 7th. Brussels: International Diabetes Federation; 2015. 8. Middelbeek RJW, Abrahamson MJ. Diabetes, prediabetes, and glycemic control in the United States: challenges and opportunities. Ann Intern Med. 2014;160:572-573. 9. Forouhi N, Luan J, Hennings S, Wareham N. Incidence of Type 2 diabetes in England and its association with baseline impaired fasting glucose: the Ely study 1990-2000. Diabetic medicine. 2007;24(2):200-7., Nathan DM, Davidson MB, DeFronzo RA, Heine RJ, Henry RR, Pratley R, et al. Impaired fasting glucose and impaired glucose tolerance. Diabetes care. 2007;30(3):753-9. 10. Hu D, Fu P, Xie J, et al. MS for the InterASIA Collaborative Group Increasing prevalence and low awareness, treatment and control of diabetes mellitus among Chinese adults: the InterASIA study. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2008;81:250-257. 11. Brannick B, Wynn A, Dagogo-Jack S. Prediabetes as a toxic environment for the initiation of microvascular and macrovascular complications. Exp Biol Med (Maywood) 2016;241:1323-1331. 12. Tuligenga RH, Dugravot A, Tabak AG, et al. Midlife type 2 diabetes and poor glycaemic control as risk factors for cognitive decline in early old age: a post-hoc analysis of the Whitehall II cohort study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2014;2:228-235. doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(13)70192-X. 13. Alosco ML, Gunstad J. The negative effects of obesity and poor glycemic control on cognitive function: a proposed model for possible mechanisms. Curr Diab Rep. 2014. June; 14(6): 495 10.1007/s11892-014-0495. 14. Munshi M, Capelson R, Grande R, Lin S, Hayes M, Milberg W, et al. Cognitive dysfunction is associated with Poor Diabetes Control in Older Adults. Diabetes Care, 2006. August; 29(8): 1794-1799. 10.2337/dc06-0506. 15. Koekkoek PS, Kappelle LJ, van den Berg E, Rutten GE, Biessels GJ. Cognitive function in patients with diabetes mellitus: guidance for daily care. Lancet Neurol. 2015. March; 14(3): 329-340. 10.1016/S1474-4422(14)70249-2. 16. Roriz-Filho S.Sa-Roriz T.M.Rosset I.et al.(Pre)diabetes, brain aging, and cognition.Biochim Biophys Acta. 2009; 1792: 432-443. 17. Woollacott M, Shumway-Cook A. Attention and the control ofposture and gait: a review of an emerging area of research. GaitPosture 2002; 16(1): 1-14. 18. Wollacott M, Shumway-Cook A. Attention and the control of posture and gait; a review of an emerging area of research. Gait Posture 2002; 16: 1- 14. 19. Villafaina S., Collado-Mate D., Domínguez-Muñoz F.J., Fuentes-García J.P., Gusi N. Impact of adding a cognitive task while performing physical fitness tests in women with fibromyalgia: A cross-sectional descriptive study. Medicine (Baltimore) 2018;97:e13791. 20. Omana H, Madou E., Montero-Odasso et all. The Effect of Dual-Task Testing on Balance and Gait Performance in Adults with Type 1 or Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review., Current Diabetes ReviewsBentham science Publishers, Current Diabetes Reviews, 2020, Vol.16, no.1-0.
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Anticipated)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Anticipated)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Anticipated)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- BartınU
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.