Mental practice effect on line-tracing accuracy in persons with hemiparetic stroke: A preliminary study

Yoo, Eun‐Young; Park, Eun‐Young; Chung, Byunghoon

doi:10.1053/apmr.2001.25095

Cited by 59 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A critical appraisal of the study designs resulted in 4 studies being categorized as Level I evidence (Page, 2000;Page, Levine, & Leonard, 2005Page, Levine, Sisto, & Johnston, 2001b), 2 as Level II (Dijkerman, Ietswaart, Johnston, & MacWalter, 2004;Müller, Bütefisch, Seitz, & Hömberg, 2007), 1 as Level III (Simmons, Sharma, Baron, & Pomeroy, 2008), 6 as Level IV (Butler & Page, 2006;Crosbie, McDonough, Gilmore, & Wiggam, 2004;Hewett, Ford, Levine, & Page, 2007;Page, Levine, & Hill, 2007;Stevens & Phillips Stoykov, 2003;Yoo, Park, & Chung, 2001), and 2 as Level V (Gaggioli, Meneghini, Morganti, Alcaniz, & Riva, 2006;Page, Levine, Sisto, & Johnston, 2001a).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, it appeared some studies had participants use an internal (i.e., first-person) view (e.g., Müller et al, 2007;Page et al, 2005;Page, Levine, & Leonard, 2007;Simmons et al, 2008), and others had participants use an external (i.e., third-person) view (e.g., Page, 2000;Page et al, 2001aPage et al, , 2001b. In several studies, the perspective used was not clearly articulated (e.g., Crosbie et al, 2004;Dijkerman et al, 2004;Yoo et al, 2001). Additionally, the studies used various tasks during the mental practice sessions.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Additionally, the studies used various tasks during the mental practice sessions. These tasks included selective finger opposition sequences (Mü ller et al, 2007), simple wrist and forearm movements (Stevens & Phillips Stoykov, 2003), line tracing (Yoo et al, 2001), and functional reaching and grasping tasks (Crosbie et al, 2004;Dijkerman et al, 2004;Page, 2000;Page et al, 2005;Page, Levine, & Hill, 2007;Page, Levine, & Leonard, 2007). With reference to intensity and duration, RCT studies varied considerably regarding the number of trials or minutes engaged in practice, with participants receiving approximately 4-5 hr of mental practice over a 4-wk (Page, 2000) or 6-wk period (Page et al, 2001b), respectively, at a minimum to a maximum of 21 hr over a 6-wk period (Page et al, 2005).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Use of Mental Practice to Improve Upper-Limb Recovery After Stroke: A Systematic Review

Nilsen

Gillen

Gordon

2010

The American Journal of Occupational Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVE. We sought to determine whether mental practice is an effective intervention to improve upper-limb recovery after stroke. METHOD. We conducted a systematic review of the literature, searching electronic databases for the years 1985 to February 2009. We selected studies according to specified criteria, rated each study for level of evidence, and summarized study elements. RESULTS. Studies differed with respect to design, patient characteristics, intervention protocols, and outcome measures. All studies used imagery of tasks involving movement of the impaired limb. The length of the interventions and number of practice hours varied. Results suggest that mental practice combined with physical practice improves upper-limb recovery. CONCLUSION. When added to physical practice, mental practice is an effective intervention. However, generalizations are difficult to make. Further research is warranted to determine who will benefit from training, the dosing needed, the most effective protocols, whether improvements are retained, and whether mental practice affects perceived occupational performance.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Use of Mental Practice to Improve Upper-Limb Recovery After Stroke: A Systematic Review

Nilsen

Gillen

Gordon

2010

The American Journal of Occupational Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Only studies that focus exclusively on motor imagery of the upper-limb function and rehabilitation after stroke will be considered. Although other articles have been published [67][68][69][70][71][72][73][74][75] only 5 fulfilled the criteria. 29,30 -33 Clinical Data Details of the number and characteristics of subjects included in the 5 primary studies are given in Table 1.…”

Section: Inclusion Criteriamentioning

confidence: 99%

Motor Imagery

Sharma

Pomeroy²,

Baron³

2006

Stroke

585

288

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Purpose-Understanding brain plasticity after stroke is important in developing rehabilitation strategies.Active movement therapies show considerable promise but depend on motor performance, excluding many otherwise eligible patients. Motor imagery is widely used in sport to improve performance, which raises the possibility of applying it both as a rehabilitation method and to access the motor network independently of recovery. Specifically, whether the primary motor cortex (M1), considered a prime target of poststroke rehabilitation, is involved in motor imagery is unresolved. Summary of Review-We review methodological considerations when applying motor imagery to healthy subjects and in patients with stroke, which may disrupt the motor imagery network. We then review firstly the motor imagery training literature focusing on upper-limb recovery, and secondly the functional imaging literature in healthy subjects and in patients with stroke. Conclusions-The review highlights the difficulty in addressing cognitive screening and compliance in motor imagery studies, particularly with regards to patients with stroke. Despite this, the literature suggests the encouraging effect of motor imagery training on motor recovery after stroke. Based on the available literature in healthy volunteers, robust activation of the nonprimary motor structures, but only weak and inconsistent activation of M1, occurs during motor imagery. In patients with stroke, the cortical activation patterns are essentially unexplored as is the underlying mechanism of motor imagery training. Provided appropriate methodology is implemented, motor imagery may provide a valuable tool to access the motor network and improve outcome after stroke.

show abstract

“…As such, motor imagery corresponds to an active cognitive process during which the representation of a specific action is internally reproduced within working memory without any overt motor output, i.e., no discernible EMG activities (Decety and Grezes 1999). Accumulated evidence has demonstrated that motor imagery is subject to the same movement rules and constraints that physical movements follow, including Fitts's laws (Decety and Jeannerod 1995), autonomic reactions (Decety et al 1991), kinematic constraints (Sirigu et al 1995), temporal properties (Decety et al 1989;Sirigu et al 1995), effects on motor performance (Yue and Cole 1992), the role in skill acquisition (Pascual-Leone et al 1995) and in motor recovery after stroke (Page et al 2001;Yoo et al 2001;Stevens and Stoykov 2003;Malouin et al 2004). These functional similarities between actual and imagined movements could be ascribed to, at least in part, shared common neural substrates along the neuroaxis, including primary motor cortex (M1) areas, as demonstrated by different brain mapping/imaging studies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Movement-specific enhancement of corticospinal excitability at subthreshold levels during motor imagery

2006

Exp Brain Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined modulation of corticospinal excitability during both actual and imagined movements. Seven young healthy subjects performed actual (3% to 50% maximal voluntary contraction) and imagined index finger force production, and rest. Individual responses to focal transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in four fingers (index, middle, ring, and little) were recorded for all three tested conditions. The force increments at the threshold of activation were derived from regression analysis, representing the TMS-induced response at the threshold activation of the corticospinal pathways. The increment in the index finger during motor imagery was larger than that at rest, but smaller than that at the threshold of activation. On the other hand, the increment in the uninstructed (middle, ring and little), slave fingers during motor imagery was larger than that at rest, but not different from that at the threshold of activation. These contrasting results suggest that the degree of imagery-induced enhancement in corticospinal excitability was significantly less than what could be predicted for threshold levels from regression analysis, but only for the index finger, and not the adjacent slave fingers. It is concluded that corticospinal excitability for the explicitly instructed index finger is specifically enhanced at subthreshold levels during motor imagery.

show abstract

Mental practice effect on line-tracing accuracy in persons with hemiparetic stroke: A preliminary study

Cited by 59 publications

References 14 publications

Use of Mental Practice to Improve Upper-Limb Recovery After Stroke: A Systematic Review

Use of Mental Practice to Improve Upper-Limb Recovery After Stroke: A Systematic Review

Motor Imagery

Movement-specific enhancement of corticospinal excitability at subthreshold levels during motor imagery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About