Neural Correlates of Single-Task Versus Cognitive-Motor Dual-Task Training
Neural Correlates of Single-Task Versus Cognitive-Motor Dual-Task Training
复制标题
单任务与认知运动双任务训练的神经相关性
DOI：
10.1109/tcds.2021.3053050
复制
发表时间：
2022-06
影响因子：
5
通讯作者：
Hou Zeng-Guang
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Wang Jiaxing;Wang Weiqun;Ren Shixin;Shi Weiguo;Hou Zeng-Guang
单任务和认知运动双任务训练（CMDT）已被广泛研究用于中风后功能康复。然而，人们对执行这两类任务时大脑活动之间的差异知之甚少。因此，本研究研究了单一认知/运动任务训练 (SCT/SMT) 与 CMDT 的神经相关性。具体来说，分别为 SCT 和 SMT 范式设计了纯数学问题解决任务和纯循环任务。对于 CMDT，受试者应同时执行这两项任务。在执行这两种类型的训练期间获取的脑电图信号用于通过事件相关电位和事件相关（去）同步分析来分析大脑动态特性。从结果可以看出，与SCT相比，CMDT可以显着提高theta事件相关的同步性（额叶theta: <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$p$ </tex-math></inline-formula>-value <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$= 5.44e-05 < 0.0001$ </tex-math></inline-formula> 和时间 theta： <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$p$ </tex-math></inline-formula>-value <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$= 9.18e-06 < 0.0001$ </tex-math></inline-formula>），同时， mu 和CMDT 引起的中心 beta 事件相关去同步明显低于 SMT 引起的 (mu: p-value <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$= 2.28e-06 < 0.0001$ </tex-math></inline-formula> 和central beta: p-value <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$= 4.37e-06 < 0.0001$ </tex-math></inline-formula>）。因此，本研究证明，SMT比CMDT可以诱导更高的运动神经参与度，同时，与SCT相比，CMDT可以诱导更高的认知神经活动，这可以通过多任务协调诱导更多的神经活动来解释。此外，我们发现，在双任务训练过程中，对相对困难的任务给予了更多的关注。因此，CMDT范式中每个任务的难度级别可以针对特定主题进行设计，以实现个性化训练。
Single-task and cognitive-motor dual-task training (CMDT) has been extensively studied for the post-stroke function rehabilitation. However, little is known about the difference between the brain activities when these two types of tasks are being implemented. Therefore, neural correlates of single-cognitive/motor-task training (SCT/SMT) versus CMDT are investigated in this study. Specifically, a pure mathematical problem-solving task and a pure cycling task were designed for the SCT and SMT paradigms, respectively. For the CMDT, subjects should perform these two tasks simultaneously. Electroencephalography signals acquired during performing these two types of training are used to analyze the brain dynamic properties by event-related potential and event-related (de-)synchronization analyses. It can be seen from the results that compared with the SCT, theta event-related synchronization can be increased significantly by the CMDT (frontal theta: <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$p$ </tex-math></inline-formula>-value <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$= 5.44e-05 < 0.0001$ </tex-math></inline-formula> and temporal theta: <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$p$ </tex-math></inline-formula>-value <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$= 9.18e-06 < 0.0001$ </tex-math></inline-formula>) and, meanwhile, the mu and central beta event-related desynchronization induced by the CMDT is significantly lower than that induced by the SMT (mu: p-value <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$= 2.28e-06 < 0.0001$ </tex-math></inline-formula> and central beta: p-value <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$= 4.37e-06 < 0.0001$ </tex-math></inline-formula>). Therefore, it is proved in this study that the SMT can induce higher motor neural engagement than the CMDT and, meanwhile, compared with the SCT, higher cognitive neural activity can be induced by the CMDT, which can be explained by that the multitask coordination induces more neural activities. In addition, it is found that more attention has been paid on the relatively difficult task during the dual-task training. Therefore, the difficulty level of each task in the CMDT paradigm can be designed subject specific to implement the personalized training.