Physical Activity and Cognitive Function in the Elderly: a Systematic Review

Background: Physical activity appears important contributor for healthy aging, including cognitive function. However, it is unclear whether late life physical activity alone is beneficial to cognitive function. We performed a systematic review to examine the effect of late life physical activity in maintaining cognitive function in older persons.
Methods: Search Strategy and Selection criteria: The search sources consisted of PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL), and the University of Washington Medical School Library Database between July 15, 2011 and August 15, 2012 with language restricted to English. Studies that were published in journals on or after January 2000 with participants older than 60 years of age were reviewed. Randomized controlled trials including at least 30 participants and lasting for at least 6 months and all observational studies of at least 100 participants and lasting at least 1 year in duration were eligible for inclusion Two reviewers assessed the applicability and results of these studies.
Results: Twenty-six studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria are included. Twenty-one studies reported that late life physical activity resulted in maintenance or enhancement of cognitive function. Three studies reported a dose-response relationship between physical activity and cognition.
Conclusions: Late life physical activity is beneficial for cognitive function in the elderly. However, the majority of the evidence is of medium quality with moderate risk of bias. Larger, randomized controlled trials are needed to better define the association between late life physical activity and cognitive function. Further research is required to determine which types of exercise have the greatest benefits on specific cognitive domains. Despite these caveats, current data are sufficient to recommend that moderate level, late life physical activity may be an effective method to improve cognitive function and delay the onset and progression of cognitive disease in the elderly.

'Sorry I meant the patient's left side': impact of distraction on right/left discrimination

Context Medical students can have difficulty in distinguishing left from right. Many infamous medical errors have occurred when a procedure has been performed on the wrong side, such as in the removal of the wrong kidney. Clinicians encounter many distractions during their work. There is limited information on how these affect performance. 
Objectives Using a neuropsychological paradigm, we aim to elucidate the impacts of different types of distraction on left–right (LR) discrimination ability. 
Methods Medical students were recruited to a study with four arms: (i) control arm (no distraction); (ii) auditory distraction arm (continuous ambient ward noise); (iii) cognitive distraction arm (interruptions with clinical cognitive tasks), and (iv) auditory and cognitive distraction arm. Participants’ LR discrimination ability was measured using the validated Bergen Left–Right Discrimination Test (BLRDT). Multivariate analysis of variance was used to analyse the impacts of the different forms of distraction on participants’ performance on the BLRDT. Additional analyses looked at effects of demographics on performance and correlated participants’ self-perceived LR discrimination ability and their actual performance. 
Results A total of 234 students were recruited. Cognitive distraction had a greater negative impact on BLRDT performance than auditory distraction. Combined auditory and cognitive distraction had a negative impact on performance, but only in the most difficult LR task was this negative impact found to be significantly greater than that of cognitive distraction alone. There was a significant medium-sized correlation between perceived LR discrimination ability and actual overall BLRDT performance. 
Conclusions
Distraction has a significant impact on performance and multifaceted approaches are required to reduce LR errors. Educationally, greater emphasis on the linking of theory and clinical application is required to support patient safety and human factor training in medical school curricula. Distraction has the potential to impair an individual's ability to make accurate LR decisions and students should be trained from undergraduate level to be mindful of this.

Recovery of Sleep or Recovery of Self? A Grounded Theory Study of Residents’ Decision Making Regarding How to Spend Their Nonclinical Postcall Time

Purpose: As resident work hours policies evolve, residents’ off-duty time remains poorly understood. Despite assumptions about how residents should be using their postcall, off-duty time, there is little research on how residents actually use this time and the reasoning underpinning their activities. This study sought to understand residents’ nonclinical postcall activities when they leave the hospital, their decision-making processes, and their perspectives on the relationship between these activities and their well-being or recovery.

Method: The study took place at a Liaison Committee on Medical Education–accredited Canadian medical school from 2012 to 2014. The authors recruited a purposive and convenience sample of postgraduate year 1–5 residents from six surgical and nonsurgical specialties at three hospitals affiliated with the medical school. Using a constructivist grounded theory approach, semistructured interviews were conducted, audio-taped, transcribed, anonymized, and combined with field notes. The authors analyzed interview transcripts using constant comparative analysis and performed post hoc member checking.

Results: Twenty-four residents participated. Residents characterized their predominant approach to postcall decision making as one of making trade-offs between multiple, competing, seemingly incompatible, but equally valuable, activities. Participants exhibited two different trade-off orientations: being oriented toward maintaining a normal life or toward mitigating fatigue.

Conclusions: The authors’ findings on residents’ trade-off orientations suggest a dual recovery model with postcall trade-offs motivated by the recovery of sleep or of self. This model challenges the dominant viewpoint in the current duty hours literature and suggests that the duty hours discussion must be broadened to include other recovery processes.