Skip to content

Effects of RLIC on Motor Learning in Middle-aged and Older Adults

Effects of Remote Limb Ischemic Conditioning on Motor Learning in Middle-aged and Older Adults

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 1
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03582943
Enrollment
82
Registered
2018-07-11
Start date
2015-10-20
Completion date
2017-10-01
Last updated
2018-10-24

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Adults, Older Adults

Keywords

remote ischemic conditioning, motor learning

Brief summary

The purpose of this research is to determine if the beneficial effects of remote limb ischemic conditioning on learning seen in young adults are found in middle-aged and older adults.

Detailed description

Ischemic conditioning is an endogenous phenomenon in which exposing a target organ or tissue to one or more brief episodes of ischemia results in protection of that organ against subsequent ischemia. The effects of ischemic conditioning are not confined within an organ but can be can be transferred from one organ to another, a technique called remote ischemic conditioning. A clinically feasible method for this is remote limb ischemic conditioning (RLIC), where episodes of ischemia and perfusion are induced with a blood pressure cuff placed on the arm. The overall goal of this line of work is to use ischemic conditioning to enhance learning and outcomes in persons with neurologic injuries. Two previous studies have shown that remote limb ischemic conditioning (RLIC) can enhance learning a motor task in healthy young adults. The next step is to determine which individuals would receive maximum benefit from RLIC before applying these findings to clinical rehabilitation populations such as stroke. Numerous factors, such as age, body mass index (BMI), sex, and cardiovascular comorbidities may influence the response. The current study determines if RLIC can enhance learning in middle-aged and older adults with their burden of co-morbidities.

Interventions

BEHAVIORALRLIC

See descriptions under arm/group descriptions. RLIC is delivered for 7 visits, occurring on consecutive weekdays.

See descriptions under arm/group descriptions. Sham conditioning is delivered for 7 visits, occurring on consecutive weekdays.

BEHAVIORALBalance training

All participants undergo training on a balance board, learning to hold the board level with equal weight on each leg. This is a motor learning task. Participants perform the balance task for 15, 30-second trials per day at visits 3-7.

Sponsors

Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)
CollaboratorNIH
Washington University School of Medicine
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)

Masking description

Participants are masked to their group assignment.

Intervention model description

Single blinded, randomized, controlled trial

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
40 Years to 80 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

1. 40-80 years old 2. Had sufficient cognitive skills to provide informed consent and actively participate.

Exclusion criteria

(determined by self-report): 1. History of a neurological condition, balance impairment, or vestibular disorder. 2. History of attentional disorders (ADD/ADHD) that could affect learning. 3. History of sleep apnea which could confound the effects of RLIC. 4. Presence of lower extremity condition, injury, or surgery that would compromise performance on the balance task. 5. Learning disability, sensory, or communication problem that would prevent completion of the study. 6. History of epilepsy, peripheral vascular disease, or blood diathesis which could contraindicate RLIC. 7. Current intensive weight lifting or interval training exercise which could confound the effects of RLIC. 8. Current substance abuse or dependence.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change in Balance Score1 weekBalance score at the end of training - balance score at baseline, where balance score is the average amount of time in seconds that a participant maintains the stability platform within ±3° of horizontal position during 5 trials of 30 seconds each. Five trials are averaged to form the balance score at each time point.

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Recruitment details

Participants recruited by word-of-mouth and through participant registry. Assessed for eligibility, n = 182. Excluded, n = 100 with n = 33 not meeting criteria, n = 64 declined to participate, and n = 3 pilot participants who were not randomized.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Remote Limb Ischemic Conditioning (RLIC)
RLIC is achieved via blood pressure cuff inflation to 20 mmHg above systolic blood pressure on the dominant arm. RLIC requires 45 minutes and involves 5 cycles of 5 minutes blood pressure cuff inflation followed by alternating 5 minutes of cuff deflation. RLIC is performed on visits 1-7. RLIC: See descriptions under arm/group descriptions. RLIC is delivered for 7 visits, occurring on consecutive weekdays. Balance training: All participants undergo training on a balance board, learning to hold the board level with equal weight on each leg. This is a motor learning task. Participants perform the balance task for 15, 30-second trials per day at visits 3-7.
33
Sham Conditioning
Sham conditioning is achieved via blood pressure cuff inflation to 10 mmHg under diastolic blood pressure on the dominant arm. Sham conditioning requires 45 minutes and involves 5 cycles of 5 minutes blood pressure cuff inflation followed by alternating 5 minutes of cuff deflation. Sham conditioning is performed on visits 1-7. Sham conditioning: See descriptions under arm/group descriptions. Sham conditioning is delivered for 7 visits, occurring on consecutive weekdays. Balance training: All participants undergo training on a balance board, learning to hold the board level with equal weight on each leg. This is a motor learning task. Participants perform the balance task for 15, 30-second trials per day at visits 3-7.
36
Total69

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001
Allocated to GroupsWithdrawal by Subject11
AnalyzedProtocol Violation41
Intervention and Follow upWithdrawal by Subject42

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicRemote Limb Ischemic Conditioning (RLIC)Sham ConditioningTotal
Age, Continuous60.4 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.5
61.8 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 9
61.2 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10
Body mass index26.5 kg/m^2
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.4
26.8 kg/m^2
STANDARD_DEVIATION 5.1
26.6 kg/m^2
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.8
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Race
African-American
8 Participants10 Participants18 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Race
Caucasian
25 Participants26 Participants51 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
33 Participants36 Participants69 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
22 Participants25 Participants47 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
11 Participants11 Participants22 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 330 / 36
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 330 / 36
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 330 / 36

Outcome results

Primary

Change in Balance Score

Balance score at the end of training - balance score at baseline, where balance score is the average amount of time in seconds that a participant maintains the stability platform within ±3° of horizontal position during 5 trials of 30 seconds each. Five trials are averaged to form the balance score at each time point.

Time frame: 1 week

Population: Only participants who completed the entire protocol and did not have a protocol deviation were analyzed.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Remote Limb Ischemic Conditioning (RLIC)Change in Balance Score5.55 secondsStandard Deviation 4.85
Sham ConditioningChange in Balance Score4.81 secondsStandard Deviation 3.47
p-value: 0.984Mixed Models Analysis
p-value: 0.455Mixed Models Analysis
p-value: 0.803Mixed Models Analysis
p-value: 0.233Mixed Models Analysis
p-value: 0.29Mixed Models Analysis

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026