NCT05452460

Mindfulness Training, Mental Fatigue, Endurance Performance and Neurocognitive Functions

Completed NA Results posted Last updated 30 January 2025

What this trial tests

NA trial testing Mindfulness intervention in Mindfulness Training in 53 participants. Completed in 10 January 2023.

Timeline

17 February 2022

Primary endpoint
10 January 2023

10 January 2023

Quick facts

Lead sponsor	National Taiwan Normal University
Phase	NA
Status	Completed
Study type	INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation	randomized
Design	parallel
Masking	none
Primary purpose	treatment
Enrollment	53
Start date	17 February 2022
Primary completion	10 January 2023
Estimated completion	10 January 2023
Sites	1 location across Taiwan

Drugs / interventions tested

• Mindfulness intervention

Conditions studied

• Mindfulness Training — all drugs for Mindfulness Training →
• Neurocognitive Function — all drugs for Neurocognitive Function →
• Sports Performance — all drugs for Sports Performance →
• Mental Fatigue — all drugs for Mental Fatigue →

Sponsor

National Taiwan Normal University

Who can join

Adults 18 to 25, any sex, with Mindfulness Training or Neurocognitive Function. Patients with the condition only — healthy volunteers not accepted.

Results — posted to ClinicalTrials.gov

Per-arm endpoint measurements with 95% confidence intervals where reported. Source: trial results section.

Inhibitory Control: Reaction Time Primary · After 30-minute mental fatigue and control conditions at pre-test and post-test (8 weeks)

Followed by the manipulation conditions, inhibitory control will be evaluated by a Flanker task (i.e., either mental fatigue condition or control condition). In the Flanker task, participants will be presented with five arrows and will be instructed to respond as quickly and accurately as possible to the direction where the middle arrow is pointing (i.e., left or right). Types of trials are the congruent (i.e., \> \> \> \> \>) and incongruent (i.e., \< \< \> \< \<). The reaction time (RT) and accuracy (ACC) of the incongruent trials were calculated as inhibitory control performance, and the di

Condition difference in RT of Flanker task (pre-test)

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	10.79	± 57.89
Waitlist Control Group	5.47	± 42.72

Condition difference in RT of Flanker task (post-test)

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	4.11	± 19.63
Waitlist Control Group	-0.61	± 19.90

Inhibitory Control: Accuracy Primary · After 30-minute mental fatigue and control conditions at pre-test and post-test (8 weeks)

Followed by the manipulation conditions, inhibitory control will be evaluated by a Flanker task (i.e., either mental fatigue condition or control condition). In the Flanker task, participants will be presented with five arrows and will be instructed to respond as quickly and accurately as possible to the direction where the middle arrow is pointing (i.e., left or right). Types of trials are the congruent (i.e., \> \> \> \> \>) and incongruent (i.e., \< \< \> \< \<). The reaction time (RT) and accuracy (ACC) of the incongruent trials were calculated as inhibitory control performance, and the di

Condition difference in ACC of Flanker task (pre-test)

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	6.15	± 11.79
Waitlist Control Group	2.32	± 11.97

Condition difference in ACC of Flanker task (post-test)

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	2.60	± 6.12
Waitlist Control Group	2.61	± 4.83

ERP: N2 Primary · After 30-minute mental fatigue and control conditions at pre-test and post-test (8 weeks)

The neuroelectrical activities (i.e., N2, P3) during the Flanker task were recorded and analyzed using the Neuroscan system. The difference in neuroelectrical activities between conditions (i.e., mental fatigue condition \& control condition) were calculated as mental fatigue-related impairment in neuroelectrical markers of inhibitory control.

Condition difference in N2 amplitude at pre-test (incongruent trial)

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	-1.27	± 3.48
Waitlist Control Group	-1.14	± 4.85

Condition difference in N2 amplitude at post-test (incongruent trial)

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	0.72	± 4.07
Waitlist Control Group	0.18	± 2.58

ERP: P3 Primary · After 30-minute mental fatigue and control conditions at pre-test and post-test (8 weeks)

The neuroelectrical activities (i.e., N2, P3) during the Flanker task were recorded and analyzed using the Neuroscan system. The difference in neuroelectrical activities between conditions (i.e., mental fatigue condition \& control condition) were calculated as mental fatigue-related impairment in neuroelectrical markers of inhibitory control.

Condition difference in P3 amplitude at pre-test (incongruent trial)

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	-0.28	± 3.85
Waitlist Control Group	0.19	± 5.23

Condition difference in P3 amplitude at post-test (incongruent trial)

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	0.78	± 6.05
Waitlist Control Group	-0.69	± 5.60

Endurance Performance: Time to Exhaustion Primary · After 30-minute mental fatigue and control conditions at pre-test and post-test (8 weeks)

The graded exercise test (GXT) on treadmill was used to assess participant's endurance performance. Bruce protocol will be adopted in the test. The initial speed and grade of the GXT will be set at 2.74 km/hr with a grade of 10% and increase speed and grade every 3 min until participants are voluntarily exhausted. The time to exhaustion (TTE) was recorded as the endurance performance. The difference in TTE between conditions was further calculated (i.e., control condition minus mental fatigue condition) for both the pre-test and post-test.

Condition difference in TTE at pre-test

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	28.50	± 32.28
Waitlist Control Group	23.89	± 36.43

Condition difference in TTE at post-test

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	-20.06	± 33.54
Waitlist Control Group	13.15	± 34.45

Endurance Performance: VO2max Primary · After 30-minute mental fatigue and control conditions at pre-test and post-test (8 weeks)

The graded exercise test (GXT) on treadmill was used to assess participant's endurance performance. Bruce protocol will be adopted in the test. The initial speed and grade of the GXT will be set at 2.74 km/hr with a grade of 10% and increase speed and grade every 3 min until participants are voluntarily exhausted. The maximum oxygen consumption (VO2 max) was recorded as the endurance performance. The difference in VO2max between conditions was further calculated (i.e., control condition minus mental fatigue condition) for both the pre-test and post-test.

Condition difference in VO2max at pre-test

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	0.86	± 4.88
Waitlist Control Group	0.92	± 4.12

Condition difference in VO2max at post-test

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	-0.16	± 2.92
Waitlist Control Group	-0.02	± 3.62

Subjective Mental Fatigue Secondary · Before, after 30-minute Stroop task and after Flanker task in the mental fatigue and control condition at pre-test and post-test (8 weeks)

Both in the baseline and post-intervention, the visual analog scale for mental fatigue (VAS-MF) was used to assess changes in subjective mental fatigue before and after experimental manipulation. The scale ranges from 0 (not at all mentally fatigued) to 100 (extremely mentally fatigued).

VAS score at T1 in pre-test (mental fatigue condition)

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	25.19	± 11.44
Waitlist Control Group	24.26	± 10.89

VAS score at T2 in pre-test (mental fatigue condition)

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	47.69	± 13.66
Waitlist Control Group	49.07	± 16.06

VAS score at T3 in pre-test (mental fatigue condition)

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	57.12	± 16.01
Waitlist Control Group	55.56	± 22.67

VAS score at T1 in pre-test (control condition)

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	24.81	± 13.38
Waitlist Control Group	21.30	± 11.40

VAS score at T2 in pre-test (control condition)

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	36.92	± 16.00
Waitlist Control Group	39.26	± 11.49

VAS score at T3 in pre-test (control condition)

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	40.77	± 16.89
Waitlist Control Group	40.19	± 13.90

VAS score at T1 in post-test (mental fatigue condition)

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	22.38	± 13.43
Waitlist Control Group	22.78	± 11.06

VAS score at T2 in post-test (mental fatigue condition)

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	48.50	± 13.79
Waitlist Control Group	50.52	± 18.09

Objective Mental Fatigue Secondary · Post 30-minute mental fatigue and control condition at pre-test and post-test (8 weeks)

Both at baseline and post-intervention, participants completed either a 30-min 100% incongruent version Stroop task (i.e., mental fatigue condition) or a 30-min 100% congruent version Stroop task (i.e., control condition). In the Stroop task, accuracy (ACC) was calculated as an index of objective mental fatigue. It is expressed as a percentage, determined by dividing the number of correct responses by the total number of responses.

The ACC of Stroop_Block 1 in pre-test (mental fatigue condition)

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	87.09	± 9.82
Waitlist Control Group	88.11	± 8.92

The ACC of Stroop_Block 2 in pre-test (mental fatigue condition)

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	83.77	± 1.43
Waitlist Control Group	85.27	± 12.18

The ACC of Stroop_Block 3 in pre-test (mental fatigue condition)

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	82.54	± 13.80
Waitlist Control Group	86.36	± 11.12

The ACC of Stroop_Block 4 in pre-test (mental fatigue condition)

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	83.72	± 13.30
Waitlist Control Group	85.36	± 11.24

The ACC of Stroop_Block 5 in pre-test (mental fatigue condition)

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	82.94	± 16.29
Waitlist Control Group	82.63	± 17.43

The ACC of Stroop_Block 1 in pre-test (control condition)

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	91.65	± 6.10
Waitlist Control Group	92.63	± 5.83

The ACC of Stroop_Block 2 in pre-test (control condition)

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	89.61	± 8.53
Waitlist Control Group	91.52	± 5.47

The ACC of Stroop_Block 3 in pre-test (control condition)

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	86.92	± 12.89
Waitlist Control Group	90.68	± 7.03

Dispositional Mindfulness Secondary · Baseline (pre-test) and 8 weeks (post-test)

The change in dispositional mindfulness was assessed using the 16-item (5-Likert scale) athlete mindfulness questionnaire (AMQ). The mean score range is between 1-5. Higher mean scores indicate a higher level of dispositional mindfulness.

AMQ score in pre-test

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	3.94	± 0.59
Waitlist Control Group	4.04	± 0.53

AMQ score in post-test

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	4.13	± 0.55
Waitlist Control Group	3.87	± 0.44

Mood State: Anger Secondary · Before, after 30-minute Stroop task in the mental fatigue and control condition at pre-test and post-test (8 weeks)

Mood state change was determined by the difference in scores on the Brunel Mood Scale-Chinese (BRUMS-C) between before and after manipulation. The BRUMS-C contains 23 item (5-Likert scale) and is divided into six sub-scales: anger, confusion, depression, fatigue, tension, and vigour. The mean score range is between 0-4. Higher mean scores indicate a higher anger mood.

Change of anger in pre-mental fatigue condition

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	0.13	± 0.64
Waitlist Control Group	0.06	± 0.24

Change of anger in post-mental fatigue condition

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	0.21	± 0.52
Waitlist Control Group	0.05	± 0.33

Change of anger in pre-control condition

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	0.12	± 0.38
Waitlist Control Group	0.37	± 0.49

Change of anger in post-control condition

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	-0.04	± 0.36
Waitlist Control Group	-0.03	± 0.31

Mood State: Confusion Secondary · Before, after 30-minute Stroop task in the mental fatigue and control condition at pre-test and post-test (8 weeks)

Mood state change was determined by the difference in scores on the Brunel Mood Scale-Chinese (BRUMS-C) between before and after manipulation. The BRUMS-C contains 23 item (5-Likert scale) and is divided into six sub-scales: anger, confusion, depression, fatigue, tension, and vigour. The mean score range is between 0-4. Higher mean scores indicate a higher confusion mood.

Change of confusion in pre-mental fatigue condition

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	0.59	± 0.78
Waitlist Control Group	0.56	± 0.75

Change of confusion in post-mental fatigue condition

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	0.70	± 0.63
Waitlist Control Group	0.50	± 0.56

Change of confusion in pre-control condition

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	0.37	± 0.49
Waitlist Control Group	0.29	± 0.54

Change of confusion in post-control condition

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	0.18	± 0.40
Waitlist Control Group	0.30	± 0.56

Mood State: Depression Secondary · Before, after 30-minute Stroop task in the mental fatigue and control condition at pre-test and post-test (8 weeks)

Mood state change was determined by the difference in scores on the Brunel Mood Scale-Chinese (BRUMS-C) between before and after manipulation. The BRUMS-C contains 23 item (5-Likert scale) and is divided into six sub-scales: anger, confusion, depression, fatigue, tension, and vigour. The mean score range is between 0-4. Higher mean scores indicate a higher depression mood.

Change of depression in pre-mental fatigue condition

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	0.07	± 0.56
Waitlist Control Group	0.05	± 0.38

Change of depression in post-mental fatigue condition

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	0.17	± 0.50
Waitlist Control Group	0.14	± 0.52

Change of depression in pre-control condition

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	0.12	± 0.38
Waitlist Control Group	-0.01	± 0.28

Change of depression in post-control condition

Group	Value	95% CI
Mindfulness Training Group	-0.01	± 0.25
Waitlist Control Group	-0.07	± 0.38

Sponsor's own description

Mental fatigue has been suggested that would impair neurocognitive functions and sports performance. On the other hand, mindfulness training (MT) seems to as a promising approach to attenuate mental fatigue and counteract its detrimental effect on cognitive functions and sports performance. The purpose of the present study is to examine the effect of MT on behavioral and neuroelectric indices of inhibitory control, and endurance performance in mentally fatigued athletes.

Publications & conference data

No peer-reviewed publications indexed yet for this trial. Completed trials usually publish results within 12-18 months.