Skip to main content

Table 3 Effects of the stepping exergame training on stepping reaction time [ms] (available-case analysis)

From: Effectiveness and sustainability of a motor-cognitive stepping exergame training on stepping performance in older adults: a randomized controlled trial

 

T1

T2

T3

T1-T2

T1-T3

n

Median (IQR)

n

Median (IQR)

n

Median (IQR)

% change* Mean ± SD

P-value

ηp2

% change* Mean ± SD

P-value

ηp2

Sub-session 1

 Level 1

  CG

29

150 (116–222)

24

127 (94–213)

25

118 (88–150)

−2.4 ± 40.8

< 0.001

0.237

−21.9 ± 37.9

0.587

0.006

  IG

29

200 (153–241)

25

95 (71–134)

24

111 (89–144)

−44.3 ± 20.6

  

−33.8 ± 29.9

  

 Level 2

  CG

24

178 (130–246)

23

170 (132–209)

25

110 (85–184)

−7.4 ± 26.2

0.001

0.235

−25.6 ± 35.4

0.667

0.005

  IG

24

273 (222–364)

24

123 (96–173)

24

131 (91–169)

−48.7 ± 31.6

  

−47.8 ± 28.0

  

 Level 3

  CG

22

151 (119–210)

22

154 (122–207)

24

134 (89–183)

+ 8.8 ± 42.3

0.036

0.120

−16.0 ± 28.0

0.033

0.127

  IG

21

222 (194–285)

22

102 (80–178)

23

135 (81–149)

−44.7 ± 33.9

  

−49.3 ± 24.4

  

 Level 4

  CG

19

125 (112–189)

23

133 (117–181)

23

144 (99–195)

+ 7.4 ± 49.7

0.030

0.147

+ 9.7 ± 45.1

0.017

0.193

  IG

17

148 (132–197)

20

100 (85–145)

20

119. (87–138)

−31.8 ± 18.3

  

−28.1 ± 17.8

  

 Level 5

  CG

14

169 (117–209)

12

152 (110–173)

17

132 (108–217)

+ 0.8 ± 45.9

0.955

< 0.001

+ 5.4 ± 37.4

0.861

0.002

  IG

7

159 (86–211)

15

120 (79–183)

14

114 (81–150)

+ 13.0 ± 87.3

  

+ 20.8 ± 72.9

  

 Sub-total score

  CG

29

175 (142–218)

24

157 (129–191)

25

141 (104–177)

−6.9 ± 20.3

< 0.001

0.468

− 22.1 ± 23.7

0.056

0.077

  IG

29

222 (177–254)

25

118 (85–152)

24

126 (95–166)

−46.2 ± 18.6

  

− 39.9 ± 19.6

  

Sub-session 2

 Level 6

  CG

29

159 (108–223)

25

132 (101–179)

24

138 (90–163)

+ 10.7 ± 74.5

0.039

0.090

−5.9 ± 58.1

0.115

0.054

  IG

29

156 (109–248)

24

103 (83–159)

24

91 (74–154)

−24.4 ± 35.6

  

−31.3 ± 30.0

  

 Level 7

  CG

29

147 (116–246)

25

108 (92–157)

24

137 (80–177)

−9.1 ± 51.0

0.095

0.058

−4.5 ± 51.9

0.169

0.042

  IG

29

164 (104–252)

25

81 (69–142)

24

114 (80–151)

−31.4 ± 40.0

  

−24.9 ± 43.0

  

 Level 8

  CG

28

136 (98–223)

24

111 (93–142)

24

128 (91–194)

−9.7 ± 50.5

0.415

0.015

+ 13.6 ± 74.6

0.152

0.046

  IG

29

152 (111–211)

25

101 (81–163)

24

105 (82–148)

−26.3 ± 25.0

  

−15.4 ± 61.0

  

 Level 9

  CG

28

133 (105–191)

24

130 (86–190)

23

116 (90–143)

+ 5.9 ± 51.1

0.092

0.060

−3.8 ± 52.9

0.551

0.008

  IG

29

171 (112–216)

25

143 (86–177)

24

123 (76–184)

−18.8 ± 37.8

  

−16.9 ± 46.6

  

 Level 10

  CG

22

213 (135–283)

17

208 (138–298)

19

152 (124–322)

+ 6.7 ± 24.3

0.001

0.341

−10.7 ± 39.4

0.707

0.005

  IG

21

292 (215–403)

20

200 (97–257)

19

189 (133–283)

−44.2 ± 30.7

  

−34.5 ± 33.8

  

 Sub-total score

  CG

29

169 (129–213)

25

129 (113–182)

24

135 (98–161)

−4.4 ± 46.4

0.003

0.173

−13.1 ± 26.3

0.026

0.106

  IG

29

198 (137–261)

25

128 (84–157)

24

128 (89–165)

−34.5 ± 20.2

  

−31.5 ± 23.8

  

Total score (sub-session 1 & 2)

  CG

29

177 (144–210)

25

145 (121–178)

25

136 (109–181)

−5.7 ± 28.2

< 0.001

0.445

−18.2 ± 21.8

0.012

0.131

  IG

29

204 (164–263)

25

128 (84–156)

24

127 (91–166)

−42.4 ± 12.9

  

−37.6 ± 17.1

  
  1. Stepping reaction times were log-transformed to satisfy the normality assumption for statistical analysis
  2. * calculated as follows: ((retest score – baseline score) / baseline score) × 100
  3. P-values and effect sizes (ηp2) are given for group effects with adjustment for baseline covariates as calculated by analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Significant p-values < 0.05 are marked in bold
  4. T1 baseline assessment before training, T2 assessment after the 10-week training period, T3 assessment 10 weeks after training cessation, IQR interquartile range, SD standard deviation, CG control group, IG intervention group