Table 5 Overview of studies on chronic physical activity and motor performance

[1*]

OA: n = 30, f = 14, n/a, 76.4 ± 5; YA: n = 12, f = 6, n/a, 22.1 ± 2

Manual dexterity (Purdue pegboard), hand-arm movements (wrist-position matching), L + R

Grip strength

Sj: PAQ (IPAQ)

Cross-sectional, median split: energy expenditure, active OA (≥ 2900 kcal/wk) vs. inactive OA (< 2800 kcal/wk) vs. YA

Physical active OA > sedentary OA in hand-arm movements. No effect of PA-levelon manual dexterity.

[3*]

All OA: IG: n = 5, f = 3, 72–91, 80.2 ± 7.8; CG: n = 5, f = 3, 83–89, 84.8 ± 2.5

Force matching task (force tracking with index finger), D

/

Oj: CFT (submaximal graded exercise tolerance)

Interventional, IG (8 wk. low-intensity AE) vs. CG (n/a)

IG ↑ in force matching task, besides an aerobic training effect.

[7*]

All OA: active: n = 20, f = 10, 67–85, n/a; inactive: n = 20, f = 12, 67–85, n/a

Manual dexterity (Minnesota Manual Dexterity Test), n/a

Nelson Hand Reaction Test

N/a

Cross-sectional, active OA vs. inactive OA

Active OA > inactive OA in manual dexterity.

[12*]

OA tennis: n = 21, f = 10, 60–82, 67.3 ± 5.3; OA runners: n = 23, f = 10, 61–77, 68.0 ± 5.2; OA exerciser: n = 20, f = 10, 63–79, 68.2 ± 5.1; YA: n = 20, f = 10, 19–29, 21.8 ± 2.4

Manual dexterity (thumb & finger sequence), tapping speed (tapping task with a stylus), hand-arm movements (matching a ball position with wrist), D

Balance, CRT, SRT

Sj: PAQ (modified Baecke), Oj: CFT (Rockport Fitness Walking Test, estimated VO₂max)

Cross-sectional, type of activity in OA (tennis vs. runners vs. exerciser) vs. YA

No sig. difference between the different kinds of sports. No sig. correlations between estimated VO₂max and motor performance (regardless of kind of sport).

[19*]

OA: n = 41, f = 0, 60–80, n/a; YA: n = 43, f = 0, 20–30, n/a

Hand-arm movements (mirror tracing task), R

EEG (alpha activity)

Sj: PAQ (modified Baecke), Oj: CFT (submaximal bicycle test, estimated VO₂max)

Cross-sectional, median split: estimated VO₂max, YA median: 41.11 ml/kg/min, OA median: 26.01 ml/kg/min

No effect of cardiovascular fitness on hand-arm movements.

[29*]

All OA: swimmer: n = 20, f = 12, n/a, 65.4 ± 5.5; active CG: n = 34, f = 21, n/a, 67.4 ± 5.7

Hand-arm movements (sequential pointing task), D

Static postural stability test

Sj: Exercise screening questionnaire

Cross-sectional, swimming (≥ 500 per session, 3 session/wk., ≥ 3 years) vs. active CG (jogging or mountain climbing ≥3 times/wk)

Swimming group > active control group in hand-arm movements.

[33*]

All OA: IG: n = 25,f = 17, 60–94, 68.60 ± 1.45; CG: n = 10, f = 7, 60–94, 72.30 ± 1.84

Hand-arm fine motor battery: maintain arm-hand position (steadiness), aiming, motor dexterity(pin plugging), wrist-finger movements (tapping), L + R

Cognitive performance, posture, RT tasks, tactile performance

Sj: PAQ (ECQ), Oj: CFT (spiroergometry, VO₂peak)

Interventional, IG (24 wks, 1 h/wk. dance program) vs. inactive CG

IG ↑ in steadiness (L), aiming (time, L+ R), pin plugging (L + R), tapping (R). No effect of dance intervention on steadiness (R), aiming (error R; tendency for error, L: p = .051), tapping (L). CG ↑ in tapping (L). Total motor performance score: IG ↑, tendency CG ↑ (p = .073).

[34*]

All OA: expert dancer: n = 11, f = 5, 60–94, 71.18 ± 1.13; nondancer, inactive CG: n = 38, f = 30, 60–94, 71.66 ± 1.11

Hand-arm fine motor battery (see [33])

Balance & gait control, cognitive performance, posture, RT tasks, tactile performance

Sj: PAQ (ECQ)

Cross-sectional, expert dancer group vs. nondancer, inactive CG

Expert dancer > CG in aiming (error, R; tendency for time, R: p = .059), pin plugging (R). No effect of expert dancing on steadiness (L + R), aiming (error + time, L), pin plugging (L), tapping (R, tendency for L: p = .057). Total motor performance score: tendency expert dancer > CG (p = .080).

[35*]

All OA: amateur dancer n = 24, f = 19, 65–84, 71.69 ± 1.15; inactive CG: n = 38, f = 30, 61–94, 71.66 ± 1.13

Hand-arm fine motor battery (see [33])

See [34*]

Sj: PAQ (ECQ)

Cross-sectional, amateur dancers (16.4 ± 12.7 years of experience, 1.33 ± 0.24 h/wk) vs. inactive CG (without dancing or sport activities)

Amateur dancer > CG in steadiness (L), aiming (error, R), tapping (L). No effect of amateur dancing on steadiness (R), aiming (error + time, L; time, R), pin plugging (L + R), tapping (R). Total motor performance score: amateur dancer > CG.

[36*]

All OA: IG: n = 7, f = 0, 70–80, 75 ± 2; CG: n = 4, f = 0, 70–80, 76 ± 2

Force matching task (finger pinch force control: constant + sinus; 20% & 40% of MVC), L + R

Upper limb strength

Not assessed

Interventional, IG (strength training: 6 wks, 2 d/wk., 4 sets of 3 exercises: biceps curls, wrist extension) vs. CG (no training)

IG > CG at high constant force and sinusoidal force production in the trained limb. No effect of strength training on low constant force. No effect for the untrained limb.

[37*]

Sportive OA: n = 27, f = 0, n/a, 63.75 ± 5.02; nonsportive OA: n = 24, f = 0, n/a, 61.88 ± 4.67; sportive YA: n = 24, f = 0, n/a, 20.71 ± 3.18; nonsportive YA: n = 23, f = 0, n/a 22.13 ± 2.05; martial arts OA: n = 22, f = 0, n/a, 62 ± 5.89; martial arts YA: n = 23, f = 0, n/a 22.22 ± 2.88

Force matching task (force tracking task, index finger; constant: 5/25% MVC + sinus: 5–25% MCV), tapping speed (tapping task, index finger), L + R

Cognitive performance, posture

Sj: Self-reported regular exercise per week

Cross-sectional, active (regular weekly activities; YA/OA) vs. inactive (YA/OA) vs. martial arts YA/OA)

Inactive > martial arts in all force tracking conditions, no difference in sinus task. No influence of activity group on tapping speed.

[52*]

All OA: 1: n = 6, f = 3, n/a, 76 ± 6; 2: n = 6, f = 3, n/a, 76 ± 6

Manual dexterity (Grooved Pegboard Test & Jebsen Taylor Hand Function Test), force matching task (four fingers, ramp from resting level to 25% of MVC), L + R

Maximum force production task

Not assessed

Interventional, strength training: maximal finger pressing force, 6 wks, 2 times/d, 2 × 10 repetitions of 2 s), different training groups: (1)“right-distal site + left-proximal site training vs. (2) “left-distal site + right- proximal site”

Both training groups ↑ in Grooved Pegboard test, but not in Jebsen Taylor Hand function test. Tendency for ↑ in force tracking task.

[54*]

All OA: Tai chi: n = 22, f = 14; n/a, 67.8 ± 5.1; CG: n = 20, f = 15, n/a, 68.1 ± 5.2

Hand-arm movements (sequential pointing task), n/a

/

Sj: Self-reported engagement in PA

Cross-sectional, tai chi group (1–2 h, 5–7 d, > 3 y) vs. active CG (≥ 3 exercise/wk)

Tai chi group > CG (in four out of five parameter) in hand-arm movements.

[56*]

All OA 60–82, 67 ± n/a: gymnastics: n = 19, f = 15, n/a, n/a,; swimming: n = 11, f = 9; n/a, n/a; senior dance: n = 15, f = 12, n/a, n/a; CG: n = 14, f = 6

Hand-arm movements (hand and arm coordination in the clothes-pin test), L + R

Balance, blood samples, dietary habits, flexibility, SRT

Oj: CFT (exercise test on treadmill, estimated VO₂max)

Interventional, 5 months: IG 1: multi-component (45 min, 2 times/w: aerobic, strength, balance & flexibility, 65% mHR) vs. IG 2: swimmer (25 min, 2 times/w: water gymnastic + swimming. 65% mHR) vs. IG 3: senior dance (45 min, 2 times/w, 58% of mHR) vs. CG (no training), each separated in female & male

All exercise groups ↑ in hand-arm movements, no difference between female and male. Male CG ↑ with dominant hand.

[66*]

All OA: IG: n = 61, f = n/a, 60–88, 73.7 ± 6.5; CG: n = 49, f = n/a, 62–91, 77.9 ± 7.8

Manual dexterity (Pegs-over test), L + R

Balance & gait, grip strength, walking

Not assessed

Interventional, IG (low intensity multi-component exercise: stretching, flexibility, range of motion exercises, 30 min, 2 times/week, 1 year)

No ↑ of IG in manual dexterity.

[67*]

Fit OA: n = 19, f = n/a, 60–73, 63.7 ± 3.8; non fit OA: n = 19, f = n/a, 60–73, 66.4 ± 4.2; fit MA: n = 17, f = n/a, 35–45, 40.2 ± 3.7; non fit MA: n = 18, f = n/a, 35–45, 40.0 ± 3.0; fit YA: n = 15, f = n/a, 18–25, 21.8 ± 3.3; non fit YA: n = 17, f = n/a, 18–25, 23.5 ± 3.3

Tapping speed (finger tapping task), R

Battery of cognitive tasks

Oj: CFT (submaximal bicycle ergometer test, predicted VO₂max)

Cross-sectional, median split: VO₂max. YA: 44.9 ml/kg/min, MA: 33.1 ml/kg/min, OA: 25.4 ml/kg/min

No effect of fitness on tapping speed.

[73*]

Active OA1: n = 10, f = 10, 70–79, n/a; inactive OA1: n = 9, f = 9, 70–79, n/a; active OA2: n = 16, f = 16, 60–69, n/a; inactive OA2: n = 14, f = 14, 60–69, n/a; active MA: n = 18, f = 18, 50–59, n/a; inactive MA: n = 14, f = 14, 50–59, n/a; active YA: n = 10, f = 10, 20–29, n/a; inactive YA: n = 20, f = 20, 20–29, n/a

Tapping speed (stationary tapping; between target tapping), D

Digit Symbol Substitution, DRT, SRT, Trailmaking test

Sj: Self-reported amount of activity

Cross-sectional, active (walked/jogged/ran ≥3 miles/d, 3 d/wk., ≥ 5 years) vs. inactive (n/a) and age groups (OA1: 70–79, OA2: 60–69, MA: 50–59, YA: 20–29)

No effect of cardiovascular exercise on tapping speed.

[80*]

Active OA: n = 12, f = 7, n/a, 65.1 ± 0.9; inactive OA: n = 12, f = 8, n/a, 65.3 ± 1.1; active YA: n = 11, f = 5, n/a, 22.9 ± 0.5; inactive YA: n = 11, f = 5, n/a, 22.0 ± 0.6

Hand-arm movements (flexion and extension aiming wrist movements), R

/

Sj: PAQ (Baecke)

Cross-sectional, median split: Baecke score, active OA = 9.3 ± 0.2, inactive OA = 6.9 ± 0.3; active YA = 9.7 ± 0.3, inactive YA = 6.7 ± 0.3

No difference betweenphysically active OA and inactive OA in hand-arm movements.

[81*]

Fit OA: n = 13, f = 8, 61.5–65.5, 64.9 ± n/a; non fit OA: n = 13, f = 6, 61.4–68.2, 65.7 ± n/a; YA: n = 15, f = 9, 23.3–23.6, 23.5 ± n/a

See [80*]

/

Sj: PAQ (Baecke)

Cross-sectional, median split: Baecke score, active OA = 7.8 (7.6–8.8), inactive OA = 6.1 (5.3–6.9), YA = 7.9 (7.1–8.5)

Physically active OA > inactive OA in hand-arm movements.

[82*]

OA tai chi practitioners: n = 12, f = n/a, n/a, 67.75 ± 7.57; OA non-practitioners: n = 11, f = n/a, n/a, 65.85 ± 6.34; YA: n = 12, f = n/a, n/a, 23.58 ± 4.19

Hand-arm movements (cued, flexion- and abduction-reaching task), n/a

Stand-reaching task

Sj: PAQ (PASE)

Cross-sectional, long-term practice of Tai Chi (≥ 100 h practice in the last y) vs. non-practitioners

Tai chi group > non- practitioners in hand-arm movements.

[86*]

All OA: high active: n = 19, f = 19, 60–80, 70.8 ± 4.4; moderately active: n = 15, f = 15, 60–80, 71.9 ± 3.9; inactive: n = 16, f = 16 72.1 ± 4.3

Manual dexterity (Minnesota test), L + R

Balance, blood pressure, flexibility (hip, spine, shoulder), grip strength, peak expiratory flow, RT, walking

Sj: PAQ (modified Baecke)

Cross-sectional, high active vs. moderately active vs. inactive (separated in 3 tertials)

No influence of high PA level on manual dexterity.

[92*]

All OA: tai chi: n = 20, f = 8, n/a, 65.4 ± 5.5; swimmer: n = 32, f = 20, n/a, 67.0 ± 6.6; active CG: n = 34, f = 21, n/a, 67.4 ± 5.7

Hand-arm movements (sequential pointing task), D

Balance, postural stability

Sj: Self-reported engagement in PA

Cross-sectional, tai chi group (approximately 54 min/training, ≥ 3 times/wk) vs. swimming group (≥ 500 per session, 3 session/wk., ≥ 3 years) vs. active CG (non-swimmers, no tai chi)

Tai chi & swimming group > CG in hand-arm movements, tai chi & swimming group: no difference.

[93*]

All OA n = 38, f = 29: tai chi: n = 28, n/a, 76–89, 78.8 ± 2.1; locomotor activity: n = 10, n/a, 76–89, 79.2 ± 1.9

Hand-arm movements (aiming task), R

Balance

Not assessed

Interventional, exercise program (8 wks, 3 times/wk., ≥ 45 min): tai chi vs. locomotor activity (walking or jogging)

Tai chi: bigger ↑ in arm movement smoothness. Both groups: no ↑ in arm movement speed.

[94*]

All OA: tai chi: n = 12, f = 9, 76–88, 79.3 ± 2.4; locomotor activity: n = 8, f = 6, 76–88, 79.5 ± 1.9

See [93*]

/

Sj: Self-reported engagement in PA

Interventional, see [93]

Tai chi group more ↑ than CG in hand-arm movements.

[95*]

All OA: IG: n = 15, f = 10, 60–83, 69.43 ± 6.17; CG: n = 15, f = n/a, n/a, n/a: matched to IG

Manual dexterity (Motor Performance Series of the Vienna System Series), D

Balance, flexibility, grip strength, whole-body reaction time

Not assessed

Interventional, IG (low-moderate aerobic exercise, 60 min, 3 times/ week, 9 months) vs. CG (n/a)

IG ↑ in manual dexterity, CG no difference (tendency for performance decline).