To the Editor,
We read with great interest the article by Aydemir et al., which highlights the significant yet often overlooked relationship between sensory processing patterns and cognitive function in nursing home residents [1]. As clinicians, we typically focus on sensory acuity—correcting vision with glasses or hearing with aids. However, this study makes a crucial contribution by excluding participants with uncorrectable impairments, thereby isolating the role of central sensory processing. This methodological choice allows for a fascinating interpretation: the deficits observed likely reside not in the eyes or ears, but in the brain's ability to integrate and filter information.
The finding that visual over‐responsiveness is negatively associated with cognition (β = −0.321) is clinically striking [1]. In our practice, we frequently encounter residents who appear cognitively intact in quiet settings but become confused or withdrawn in visually chaotic environments. This hypersensitivity may reflect age‐related changes in cortical inhibitory control. Research in senescent models suggests that a degradation of GABAergic inhibition in the visual cortex compromises the brain's ability to filter out random neural activity or “noise” [2]. When the aging brain cannot efficiently suppress this irrelevant visual noise, it must allocate scarce cognitive resources to basic perceptual management, leaving little “bandwidth” for executive functions. Clinically, this suggests that patient complaints of “visual overwhelm” or glare sensitivity should be viewed as potential early markers of central cognitive fragility, even when standard Snellen visual acuity is normal.
Conversely, the positive association between proprioceptive seeking and cognitive status (β = 0.305) challenges the pathologization of certain motor behaviors [1]. Behaviors often labeled as “agitation” or “restlessness”—such as pacing or seeking deep pressure—might actually represent an adaptive strategy to compensate for age‐related declines in proprioceptive sensibility [3]. By actively seeking sensation, these residents may be upregulating somatosensory feedback loops to maintain body schema integrity and drive plastic‐adaptive processes. This supports the use of active sensorimotor engagement (e.g., resistance exercises, weighted blankets) rather than sedation for “restless” residents who may simply be trying to “find” their bodies in space.
Finally, the identification of interoception as the strongest predictor of cognition (β = 0.391) suggests that the ability to perceive internal states is fundamental to cognitive maintenance [1]. Preserved interoception relies on the functional integrity of the anterior insula, a hub for human awareness and emotional regulation [4]. Maintaining this awareness may offer a buffer against the behavioral dysregulation often seen in dementia.
We commend Aydemir et al. for providing evidence that supports a shift toward “Sensory‐Smart” care. Reducing environmental visual noise while amplifying meaningful proprioceptive opportunities could be a vital, non‐pharmacological strategy to sustain cognitive vitality in institutional settings.
Funding
The authors have nothing to report.
Ethics Statement
The authors have nothing to report.
Consent
The authors have nothing to report.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Chu Y.‐C. and Huang C.‐C., “Sensory Processing and Cognitive Resilience in Nursing Home Residents,” Geriatrics & Gerontology International 26, no. 1 (2026): e70315, 10.1111/ggi.70315.
Data Availability Statement
Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.
References
- 1. Aydemir F. R., Ezber A. E., Değerli M. N. Ö., and Altuntaş O., “The Mind and the Senses: Associations of Sensory Processing and Interoception With Cognitive Function in Older Adults in Nursing Homes,” Geriatrics and Gerontology International (2025): 1–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Leventhal A. G., Wang Y., Pu M., Zhou Y., and Ma Y., “GABA and Its Agonists Improved Visual Cortical Function in Senescent Monkeys,” Science 300, no. 5620 (2003): 812–815. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Goble D. J., Coxon J. P., Wenderoth N., Van Impe A., and Swinnen S. P., “Proprioceptive Sensibility in the Elderly: Degeneration, Functional Consequences and Plastic‐Adaptive Processes,” Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 33, no. 3 (2009): 271–278. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Craig A. D., “How Do You Feel–Now? The Anterior Insula and Human Awareness,” Nature Reviews. Neuroscience 10, no. 1 (2009): 59–70. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.