6533b82cfe1ef96bd12901c0
RESEARCH PRODUCT
The execution of the Grooved Pegboard test in a Dual-Task situation: A pilot study
Antonino BiancoEwan ThomasAntonio PaoliGaetano Marco IaconaAntonio PalmaLuca PetrignaLuca PetrignaSimona Pajaujienesubject
Counting backward test0301 basic medicinemedicine.medical_specialtySecondary taskPhysiologySecondary taskArticleTask (project management)03 medical and health sciences0302 clinical medicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationCounting backward test; Finger tapping test; Manual dexterity; Musculoskeletal system; Neurology; Neuroscience; Physiology; Public health; Secondary taskmedicinelcsh:Social sciences (General)lcsh:Science (General)Finger tapping testPublic healthMusculoskeletal systemMultidisciplinaryManual dexterityFinger tapping testCognitionTraining effectMotor task030104 developmental biologyNeurologyCounting backward test Finger tapping test Manual dexterity Musculoskeletal system Neurology Neuroscience PhysiologyPublic health Secondary tasklcsh:H1-99Psychology030217 neurology & neurosurgerylcsh:Q1-390NeuroscienceGrooved Pegboard Testdescription
Background Manual dexterity is an important aspect in everyday life, which is widely studied through the Grooved Pegboard Test (GPT). Since Dual-Tasks (DT) activities are widely investigated and important to simulate everyday life situations, the objectives of the present pilot study were the evaluation of the effect of a cognitive task and a motor task during the performance of the GPT and the feasibility of the GPT in a DT contest. A secondary objective was to evaluate the training effect of the GPT. Methods A total of 31 young adults (20 man and 11 woman, age (SD): 27.7 (2.5)) performed the GPT eight times to understand the presence of a training effect before performing the GPT in DT. The additional tasks were a secondary cognitive task and a secondary motor task. Results All participants were able to complete the required conditions. The GPT performed in motor DT were significantly slower than those performed singularly (p < 0.01). The GPT performed with the cognitive task was slower than the secondary motor task (p < 0.05). A training effect was present up to the 4th consecutive trial. Conclusions The GPT can be executed with a cognitive or motor task to increase the difficulty of the trial to better evaluate manual dexterity and cognitive capacities.
year | journal | country | edition | language |
---|---|---|---|---|
2020-08-01 | Heliyon |