Motor learning after unilateral brain damage

Winstein, Carolee J.; Merians, Alma S.; Sullivan, Katherine J.

doi:10.1016/s0028-3932(98)00145-6

Cited by 219 publications

(164 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

138

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous work has established that the motor control of both upper extremities may be disrupted by unilateral stroke (Pohl et al 1997;Winstein et al 1999); however, the conclusions of motor learning studies have been less consistent. Some have found motor learning deficits (Boyd and Winstein 2003), while others have not (Gomez-Beldarrain et al 1998;Winstein et al 1999).…”

Section: Implicit Learning After Brain Damagementioning

confidence: 96%

“…Some have found motor learning deficits (Boyd and Winstein 2003), while others have not (Gomez-Beldarrain et al 1998;Winstein et al 1999). Taken together, these findings led us to ask whether basal ganglia stroke would have an effect on motor learning of an implicit task (continuous-tracking) when participants used their ipsilesional upper extremity, and if so, how?…”

Section: Implicit Learning After Brain Damagementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Providing Explicit Information Disrupts Implicit Motor Learning After Basal Ganglia Stroke

Boyd¹,

Winstein²

2004

Learn. Mem.

132

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite their purported neuroanatomic and functional isolation, empirical evidence suggests that sometimes conscious explicit processes can influence implicit motor skill learning. Our goal was to determine if the provision of explicit information affected implicit motor-sequence learning after damage to the basal ganglia. Individuals with stroke affecting the basal ganglia (BG) and healthy controls (HC) practiced a continuous implicit motor-sequencing task; half were provided with explicit information (EI) and half were not (No-EI). The focus of brain damage for both BG groups was in the putamen. All of the EI participants were at least explicitly aware of the repeating sequence. Across three days of practice, explicit information had a differential effect on the groups. Explicit information disrupted acquisition performance in participants with basal ganglia stroke but not healthy controls. By retention (day 4), a dissociation was apparent-explicit information hindered implicit learning in participants with basal ganglia lesions but aided healthy controls. It appears that after basal ganglia stroke explicit information is less helpful in the development of the motor plan than is discovering a motor solution using the implicit system alone. This may be due to the increased demand placed on working memory by explicit information. Thus, basal ganglia integrity may be a crucial factor in determining the efficacy of explicit information for implicit motor-sequence learning.Explicit learning and memory are neuroanatomically sub-served by discrete regions within the medial temporal lobe that support conscious recollection of events and facts. Because no single lesion completely eliminates the development of procedural memories (although many severely disrupt them) the identification of the particular neuroanatomic structures that mediate implicit memory is not entirely clear. Studies of individuals with local damage (Vakil et al. 2000) or degenerative disease (Doyon et al. 1997) demonstrate that the basal ganglia are one of the regions that support implicit motor-sequence learning.

show abstract

Section: Implicit Learning After Brain Damagementioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Implicit Learning After Brain Damagementioning

confidence: 99%

Providing Explicit Information Disrupts Implicit Motor Learning After Basal Ganglia Stroke

Boyd¹,

Winstein²

2004

Learn. Mem.

132

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The authors chose this feedback schedule because reduced external feedback requires greater reliance on the processing of inherent information related to the performed task, leading to greater retention of a motor skill and motor learning. 31,32 The program resulted in a decrease of all interested loading variables and supports an alternative and potentially promising approach to addressing run-related injury. Although there was no explicit focus on the use of an EFA in this study, subjects were instructed to "run softer" and to make their footfalls quieter.…”

Section: External Focus Of Attentionmentioning

confidence: 78%

The Impact of Attentional Focus on the Treatment of Musculoskeletal and Movement Disorders

Hunt

Páez

Folmar

2017

Intl J Sports Phys Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Treatment plans employed by physical therapists involved in musculoskeletal rehabilitation may follow a conventional medical-model approach, isolating care at the tissue level but neglecting consideration for neurocognitive contributions to recovery. Understanding and integration of motor learning concepts into physical therapy practice is integral for influencing the human movement system in the most effective manner. One such motor learning concept is the use of verbal instruction to influence the attentional focus of the learner. Evidence suggests that encouraging an external focus of attention through verbal instruction promotes superior motor performance, and more lasting effects of a learning experience than an internal focus of attention. Utilizing an external focus of attention when instructing a patient on a motor task may facilitate improved motor performance and improved functional outcomes in treatment plans devised to address musculoskeletal injury and movement disorders. The purpose of this review is to summarize the basic principles of motor learning and available evidence on the influence an external focus of attention has on motor learning and performance, including the benefits of an external focus of attention over an internal focus of attention and how therapists may inadvertently encourage the latter. Furthermore, the benefits of possessing greater awareness of neurocognitive mechanisms are discussed to exhibit how implementing such concepts into musculoskeletal rehabilitation can maximize treatment outcomes. Level of Evidence: 5

show abstract

“…Многочисленные исследования показы-вают изменения нейронных сетей после инсульта, которые не зависят от спонтанных изменений, ас-социированных с восстановлением в острый пери-од [2,3]. Исследования других авторов [4][5][6][7][8] пока-зывают, что способность к нейропластическим из-менениям [9,10] сохраняются и в хронической ста-дии инсульта. Вероятно, существует зависимость между явлениями нейропластичности и обучением моторным навыкам [11].…”

Section: V8motors@ukrnetunclassified

Structural and Functional Neuroimaging in the Investigation of the Brain Neuroplasticity in Post-Stroke Patients (Literature Review)

Potii¹,

Tatarko²,

Snegir³

et al. 2018

Ukr. ž. med. bìol. sportu

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Motor learning after unilateral brain damage

Cited by 219 publications

References 53 publications

Providing Explicit Information Disrupts Implicit Motor Learning After Basal Ganglia Stroke

Providing Explicit Information Disrupts Implicit Motor Learning After Basal Ganglia Stroke

The Impact of Attentional Focus on the Treatment of Musculoskeletal and Movement Disorders

Structural and Functional Neuroimaging in the Investigation of the Brain Neuroplasticity in Post-Stroke Patients (Literature Review)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About