Sex Differences in Neuroanatomy of the Human Mirror Neuron System: Impact on Functional Recovery of Ischemic Hemiparetic Patients

Abstract

Background:Considering the higher activity of mirror neuron system in females, they frequently have better performance in empathy, interpersonal sensitivity, and emotional recognition compared to males.Objectives:The purpose of this study was to assess whether gender difference in neuroanatomy of the human mirror neuron system has any impact on functional recovery of ischemic hemiparetic patients.Patients and Methods:This single-blind clinical trial was conducted on 24 patients with cerebrovascular accident (CVA) in the age range of 45 - 60 years, referring at a rehabilitation center in Tehran, Iran, during 2013 - 2014. Sampling method was stratified random sampling. The subjects were assigned to 2 groups of 12 males and 12 females. Then, each group was randomly divided into 2 groups (totally 4 groups, n = 6 for each group): women watching functional movies, control women, men watching functional movies, and control men. Movies were shown to patients and then, they were evaluated by Timed Up and Go (TUG), Six-minute walk test (SMW), Barthel index (BI), and Berg balance scale (BBS).Results:Comparison of all variables related to functional activities of all groups before and after watching movies revealed significant differences. The highest percentage of change and improvement was observed in groups 1 and 3 watching the functional movies (P = 0.0001). Percentage of improvement in women of groups 1 and 2 was higher than men in groups 3 and 4 (P = 0.0003). The changes in group of females watching the functional movies (group 1) were significantly greater than in other groups (P < 0.0001).Conclusions:The Sex differences in the neuroanatomy of the human mirror neuron system affect functional recovery of patients with hemiparesis. The improvement in studied women was found to be significantly greater than studied men. The results indicate a higher chance of recovery among hemiparetic women, especially those watching functional movies.

The effect of action observation training on gait and balance of patients with neurological and musculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review

“…(Mean ± standard deviation, 66.6±8.92%). According to the adopted categories of 19 assessed papers, three studies were of high quality (scored 77.77% to 81.48%) (Bang et al, 2013; Motaqhey et al, 2015; Bellelli et al, 2010), 11 were of moderate quality (scored 62.96% to 74.07%) (Jaywant et al, 2016; Agosta and Sarasso, 2016; Park et al, 2014a, 2014b, 2017; Kim and Lee, 2015; Villafane et al, 2016, 2017; Pelosin et al, 2010; Song and Lee, 2016; Kim et al, 2014), and five were of low quality with scores ranging from 51.85 to 59.25% (Kim and Kim, 2012; Lee et al, 2017; Park and Kang, 2013; Santamato et al, 2015).…”

“…Only one study reported all items clearly (Bang et al, 2013). In addition, just five studies blinded their subjects to the intervention performed (Kim and Lee, 2015; Jaywant et al, 2016; Motaqhey et al, 2015; Park et al, 2014a; Bang et al, 2013). In seven studies, the main outcomes were measured by blinded examiners (Bang et al, 2013; Park et al, 2017; Bellelli et al, 2010; Villafane et al, 2016, 2017; Pelosin et al, 2010; Agosta and Sarasso, 2016).…”

“…To answer this item, papers are checked for sample size calculation, and if the power or sample size calculation details have been reported power item in Down and Black is answered 1; otherwise, it is scored 0, and the percentage would be reported as 100% and 0%, respectively. Only two studies had mentioned clearly about the calculated sample size (Jaywant et al, 2016; Motaqhey et al, 2015). Random allocation, assignment concealment, and confounding adjustment were other items that differed across studies.…”

“…The source of population for both control and experimental groups was the same in all studies. In seven studies, it was clear that patients in both groups were recruited over the same time (Motaqhey et al, 2015;Lee et al, 2017;Bellelli et al, 2010;Villafane et al, 2016Villafane et al, , 2017Santamato et al, 2015;Jaywant et al, 2016).…”

“…Eight studies assessed the TUG test as one of their primary outcome measures (Bang et al, 2013;Lee, 2013, 2015;Park and Hwangbo, 2015;Motaqhey et al, 2015;Pelosin et al, 2010;Santamato et al, 2015; (Bang et al, 2013;Kim and Lee, 2013;Park and Hwangbo, 2015;Motaqhey et al, 2015) (Table 7). Motaqhey et al (2015) found more favorable improvements in women compared with men who received AOT. However, Pelosin et al (2010) and Santamato et al (2015) found no improvement in the TUG test following AOT in Parkinson's disease (Table 7).…”