Objective. To investigate the effect of a 12-week multimodal motor-cognitive and resistance training (MMI) compared to a unimodal resistance training intervention (UMI) on static and dynamic visual function in glaucoma patients (GLA) and healthy controls (HC). Methods. Fifteen GLA and 24 age-matched HC participated in this randomized, controlled longitudinal pilot study. Visual function was assessed using clinical parameters and, on a treadmill, (TM) while standing (static, S0) as well as during walking at 3.5 km/h (S3.5) and a self-preferred speed (SSelf). The following outcomes were measured pre and post 12-weeks of intervention (MMI or UMI): (a) standard clinical measures and (b) TM-related measures, i.e. (i) best-corrected visual acuity without (VAS) and with crowding (VAC), (ii) visual field sensitivity (VF), and (iii) contrast sensitivity (CS). A 4-factorial repeated-measures ANOVA (SPEED [S0; S3.5; SSelf] x TIME [pre; post] x INTERVENTION [UMI; MMI] x GROUP [GLA; HC]) was applied to determine significant interaction effects (p < 0.05) and the effect size partial-eta-squared was calculated. Results. Post-interventional improvement of visual function was absent or minor. Only for standard clinical measures a main effect of TIME (visual acuity; p=0.024) and a TIME x INTERVENTION interaction (foveal sensitivity; p=0.039) were found. For S0 vs S3.5 small effects appeared in post-hoc comparisons, but TIME and TIME x SPEED just failed to reach significance for CS (p=0.059) and VAs (p=0.052), respectively. Conclusion. While trends were evident, the effect of the 12-week interventions on visual function were small and, especially for TM-walking, largely independent of group and intervention type. In future studies a greater sample of more advanced glaucoma cases should be included to probe for significant visual function differences between groups and intervention types.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

The trial was registered at the German clinical trials register (DRKS00022519).

We thank the study participants for their support of the study and gratefully acknowledge support by the German Research Foundation (DFG; Project: 423926179; HO-2002/20-1 & SCHE 1584/5-1). There was no rule of the funders in planning, conducting or reporting the current study. We acknowledge support by the Open Access Publication fund of the medical faculty of the Otto-von-Guericke-University Magdeburg.

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

The experimental protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Otto-von-Guericke University of Magdeburg in Germany (registration number: 32/18) and all procedures were in line with the Declaration of Helsinki on experiments on human beings

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.