The Acute Physical and Cognitive Effects of a Classical Workplace Physical Activity Program Versus a Motor-Cognitive Coordination Workplace Program: A Randomized Crossover Trial

Twelve Weeks of Web-Based Low to Moderate Physical Activity Breaks with Coordinative Exercises at the Workplace Increase Motor Skills but Not Motor Abilities in Office Workers-A Randomised Controlled Pilot Study

Integrating physical activity interventions at the workplace can have positive effects on the employees' health. This study aimed to evaluate a physical activity break with coordinative exercises (PAB) including juggling and balance tasks and to assess its effects on motor abilities. Thirty-two university employees were randomly allocated to an intervention (IG:20) or a control (CG:12) group. The IG participated two times per week for 12 weeks in a PAB with a duration of 15 to 20 min. We measured the unimanual, bimanual finger, and hand dexterity with the Purdue Pegboard Test, the reaction time with the Fall Stick Test, and the dynamic balance with the Y Balance Test. Juggling performance was assessed by measuring the time(s) of performing a three-ball-cascade. Furthermore, an evaluation of the PAB was executed. Participants in the IG improved their juggling performance after six and twelve weeks. These increases were significantly different compared to the CG. However, no other parameters changed significantly. The evaluation showed that the PAB was enjoyable and led to subjective improvements in the participants health and working routine. To conclude, PAB can lead to improvements in juggling performance, subjective health, and the working routine.

The effect of physical activity breaks, including motor-cognitive coordination exercises, on employees’ cognitive functions in the workplace

BACKGROUND: The findings of the effectiveness of physical activity on adults’ cognitive abilities have not yet been transferred into corresponding fields of application. OBJECTIVE: The present study evaluates a motor-cognitive coordination programme in a company to improve employees’ cognitive performance in the short and medium term. METHODS: A total of 67 employees — 32 men and 35 women aged between 19 and 61 years — participated in this study, and 55 completed the study. The sample was randomly divided into an experimental group, which received a motor-cognitive coordination training, and a control group, which received a relaxation and mobility training. Both groups met for 15-minute sessions three times a week for eight weeks. Before and after the intervention, working memory, attention, information-processing capacity, divergent thinking, and mood were measured. In addition, acute effects regarding attention and mood were tested. RESULTS: The results showed that the motor-cognitive coordination break improves working memory and divergent thinking after eight weeks of intervention, whereas neither the mood nor the information processing speed improved more for the experimental group compared to the control group. The results on the acute increase in attention performance failed to reach significance. CONCLUSION: The new approach of this study was not only the derivation and development of targeted exercises, but also their testing and evaluation in the field of application. Motor-cognitive coordination exercise in the workplace might play an important role in both occupational health management and personnel development, especially for companies that are under highly competitive and innovative pressure.

Acute effects of preventive warm-up exercises on modifiable risk factors for anterior cruciate ligament injuries: a three-arm randomized-controlled crossover trial

BACKGROUND

We aimed to compare the potential acute effects of single bouts of a classic prevention and a risk factor-focus training aiming to target modifiable anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture risk factors and the impact of neuromuscular fatigue on relevant ACL rupture risk factors.

METHODS

Two preventive warm-up (standard and ACL rupture risk factor training) and one inactive arm were compared; each of these were followed by a standardized neuromuscular fatigue protocol. The assessments included two Trail making tests (TMT-A; TMT-B, time to complete), drop jump landings (knee separation distance, normalized at hip width), as well as unanticipated counter movement jump landings (time to stabilization and peak ground reaction force).

RESULTS

We included 18 participants (25±2years). No differences were found between times and conditions for TMT (P>0.05). A significant time effect occurred in time to stabilization (F=2.6; P<0.05) and a significant time*baseline-value*jumping time interaction was seen in peak ground reaction force (F=3.1; P<0.05). No time effect was found for any knee separation distance (F=.1-2.4; P>0.05); but a significant time*baseline-value*jumping time interaction was seen at initial ground contact (F=2.8; P<0.05), and lowest point (F=4.2; P<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Risk factor-focus and classic warm-up may not differ in their acute effects on modifiable functional ACL (re-)injury risks factors.

How does a 4-week motor-cognitive training affect choice reaction, dynamic balance and cognitive performance ability? A randomized controlled trial in well-trained, young, healthy participants

Background:

We aimed to investigate the potential effects of a 4-week motor–cognitive dual-task training on cognitive and motor function as well as exercise motivation in young, healthy, and active adults.

Methods:

A total of 26 participants (age 25 ± 2 years; 10 women) were randomly allocated to either the intervention group or a control group. The intervention group performed a motor–cognitive training (3×/week), while the participants of the control group received no intervention. Before and after the intervention period of 4 weeks, all participants underwent cognitive (d2-test, Trail Making Test) and motor (lower-body choice reaction test and time to stabilization test) assessments. Following each of the 12 workouts, self-reported assessments (rating of perceived exertion, enjoyment and pleasant anticipation of the next training session) were done. Analyses of covariances and 95% confidence intervals plotting for between group and time effects were performed.

Results:

Data from 24 participants were analysed. No pre- to post-intervention improvement nor a between-group difference regarding motor outcomes (choice-reaction: F = 0.5; time to stabilization test: F = 0.7; p > 0.05) occurred. No significant training-induced changes were found in the cognitive tests (D2: F = 0.02; Trail Making Test A: F = 0.24; Trail Making Test B: F = 0.002; p > 0.05). Both enjoyment and anticipation of the next workout were rated as high.

Discussion:

The neuro-motor training appears to have no significant effects on motor and cognitive function in healthy, young and physically active adults. This might be explained in part by the participants’ very high motor and cognitive abilities, the comparably low training intensity or the programme duration. The high degree of exercise enjoyment, however, may qualify the training as a facilitator to initiate and maintain regular physical activity. The moderate to vigorous intensity levels further point towards potential health-enhancing cardiorespiratory effects.