## 4 Discussion  
The findings of this study provide the evidence that a drumming-based cognitive and physical training intervention can lead to significant improvements in cognitive per \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Control Group (n = 20)**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Experimental Group (n = 20)**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{_p-Value_} \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Measure**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Pre**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Post, Mean**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Difference**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Mean**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Pre, Mean**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Post, Mean**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Difference,**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**P-Value**} \\  & & & **(SD)** & & & **(SD)** & & **(SD)** & \\ \hline Correct & \multirow{2}{*}{33.60 (4.35)} & 36.95 & 3.35 & \multirow{2}{*}{0.070} & 34.45 & 44.80 & 10.35 & \multirow{2}{*}{0.000} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.024} \\ Answers & & (9.29) & (7.81) & & & & & & \\ Total Training & & 53.35 & 3.95 & \multirow{2}{*}{0.068} & 52.70 & 52.95 & 0.25 & \multirow{2}{*}{0.859} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.142} \\ Attempts & & (9.00) & (9.15) & & & & & & \\ Success & 68.52 (6.00) & 68.31 & \(-\)0.21 & & & & & \\ Rate & & (12.35) & (12.88) & & (17.38) & (6.17) & (17.84) & \multirow{2}{*}{0.000} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.000} \\ Time to & 511.00 & 273.45 & \(-\)237.55 & \multirow{2}{*}{0.000} & 486.55 & 123.60 & \(-\)362.95 & \multirow{2}{*}{0.000} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.138} \\ Highest Level & (187.37) & (90.09) & (237.29) & & & & & \\ MMSE \({}^{1}\) & 27.25 (2.57) & 28.80 & 1.55 & \multirow{2}{*}{0.000} & 27.00 & 28.95 & 1.95 & \multirow{2}{*}{0.000} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.394} \\  & & (1.44) & (1.64) & & (1.52) & (1.15) & (1.28) & & \\ GDS \({}^{*}\) & 5.00 & 5.25 & 0.25 & \multirow{2}{*}{0.498} & 8.50 & 8.05 & \(-\)0.45 & \multirow{2}{*}{0.560} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.410} \\  & & (4.96) & (5.11) & (1.62) & & (5.41) & (6.01) & (3.39) & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
\({}^{1}\) MMSE—Mini-Mental State Examination, \({}^{*}\) Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS).  
\end{table} 
Table 2: Difference of measures undergoing cognitive memory training in both groups. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Intervention of First Visits,**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Intervention of Final Visits,**} \\  & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Mean (SD)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Mean (SD)**} \\ \hline Brain Region & Experimental & Control & \(p\)-value & Experimental & Control & \(p\)-value \\ Region 1 & \(-\)0.10 (1.34) & \(-\)0.30 (1.06) & 0.606 & 0.52 (1.48) & 1.22 (0.82) & 0.074 \\ Region 2 & 0.34 (1.10) & \(-\)0.20 (1.39) & 0.180 & 0.58 (1.17) & 0.80 (1.63) & 0.627 formance, emotional well-being, and brain activity in older adults. Music-based and rhythm-based interventions have received growing attention due to their unique ability to engage multiple cognitive systems simultaneously. A meta-analysis by [PERSON] et al. (2010) analyzed the cognitive effects of music exposure, showing that while [PERSON] music has been linked to improvements in spatial ability, its overall impact on broader cognitive functions such as attention, memory, and executive function remains inconclusive [14]. Additionally, rhythmic interventions have been found to enhance mood, reduce stress, and improve emotional regulation [15]. Our findings showed a significant increase in the number of correct task answers post-intervention (\(p\) = 0.0004) and between-group comparisons (\(p\) = 0.0248), supporting the effectiveness of cognitive training in improving accuracy. The mixed-ANOVA results of this study corroborate our t-test findings, demonstrating that rhythm-based multimodal feedback yields specific enhancements in task accuracy both in the number of correct answers and success rates beyond those achieved by conventional memory exercises.