scholarly journals Motor Imagery and Action Observation as Effective Tools for Physical Therapy

Author(s):  
Hideki Nakano ◽  
Takayuki Kodama

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nuttawat Rungsirisilp ◽  
Yodchanan Wongsawat

Abstract Introduction: Upper extremity impairment is a problem usually found in poststroke patients, and it is seldom completely improved even following conventional physical therapy. Motor imagery (MI) and action observation (AO) therapy are mental practices that may regain motor function in poststroke patients, especially when integrating them with brain-computer interface (BCI) technology. However, previous studies have always investigated the effects of an MI- or AO-based BCI for stroke rehabilitation separately. Therefore, in this study, we aimed to propose the effectiveness of a combined AO and MI (AOMI)-based BCI with functional electrical stimulation (FES) feedback to improve upper limb functions and alter brain activity patterns in chronic stroke patients.Case presentation: A 53-year-old male who was 12 years post stroke was left hemiparesis and unable to produce any wrist and finger extension.Intervention: The participant was given an AOMI-based BCI with FES feedback 3 sessions per week for 4 consecutive weeks, and he did not receive any conventional physical therapy during the intervention. The Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) and active range of motion (AROM) of wrist extension were used as clinical assessments, and the laterality coefficient (LC) value was applied to explore the altered brain activity patterns affected by the intervention.Outcomes: The FMA-UE score improved from 34 to 46 points, and the AROM of wrist extension was increased from 0 degrees to 20 degrees. LC values in the alpha band tended to be positive whereas LC values in the beta band seemed to be slightly negative after the intervention.Conclusion: An AOMI-based BCI with FES feedback training may be a promising strategy that could improve motor function in poststroke patients; however, its efficacy should be studied in a larger population and compared to that of other therapeutic methods.Trial registration: Thai Clinical Trial Registry: TCTR20200821002. Registered 17 August 2020, http://www.thaiclinicaltrials.org



2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (supplement) ◽  
pp. 352-377 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seon Hee Jang ◽  
Frank E Pollick

The study of dance has been helpful to advance our understanding of how human brain networks of action observation are influenced by experience. However previous studies have not examined the effect of extensive visual experience alone: for example, an art critic or dance fan who has a rich experience of watching dance but negligible experience performing dance. To explore the effect of pure visual experience we performed a single experiment using functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) to compare the neural processing of dance actions in 3 groups: a) 14 ballet dancers, b) 10 experienced viewers, c) 12 novices without any extensive dance or viewing experience. Each of the 36 participants viewed short 2-second displays of ballet derived from motion capture of a professional ballerina. These displays represented the ballerina as only points of light at the major joints. We wished to study the action observation network broadly and thus included two different types of display and two different tasks for participants to perform. The two different displays were: a) brief movies of a ballet action and b) frames from the ballet movies with the points of lights connected by lines to show a ballet posture. The two different tasks were: a) passively observe the display and b) imagine performing the action depicted in the display. The two levels of display and task were combined factorially to produce four experimental conditions (observe movie, observe posture, motor imagery of movie, motor imagery of posture). The set of stimuli used in the experiment are available for download after this paper. A random effects ANOVA was performed on brain activity and an effect of experience was obtained in seven different brain areas including: right Temporoparietal Junction (TPJ), left Retrosplenial Cortex (RSC), right Primary Somatosensory Cortex (S1), bilateral Primary Motor Cortex (M1), right Orbitofrontal Cortex (OFC), right Temporal Pole (TP). The patterns of activation were plotted in each of these areas (TPJ, RSC, S1, M1, OFC, TP) to investigate more closely how the effect of experience changed across these areas. For this analysis, novices were treated as baseline and the relative effect of experience examined in the dancer and experienced viewer groups. Interpretation of these results suggests that both visual and motor experience appear equivalent in producing more extensive early processing of dance actions in early stages of representation (TPJ and RSC) and we hypothesise that this could be due to the involvement of autobiographical memory processes. The pattern of results found for dancers in S1 and M1 suggest that their perception of dance actions are enhanced by embodied processes. For example, the S1 results are consistent with claims that this brain area shows mirror properties. The pattern of results found for the experienced viewers in OFC and TP suggests that their perception of dance actions are enhanced by cognitive processes. For example, involving aspects of social cognition and hedonic processing – the experienced viewers find the motor imagery task more pleasant and have richer connections of dance to social memory. While aspects of our interpretation are speculative the core results clearly show common and distinct aspects of how viewing experience and physical experience shape brain responses to watching dance.



2021 ◽  
Vol 152 ◽  
pp. 105768
Author(s):  
Fabio Castro ◽  
Paulina Anna Bryjka ◽  
Giovanni Di Pino ◽  
Aleksandra Vuckovic ◽  
Alexander Nowicky ◽  
...  


2021 ◽  
pp. 135907
Author(s):  
Yoshiyuki Suzuki ◽  
Naotsugu Kaneko ◽  
Atsushi Sasaki ◽  
Fumiya Tanaka ◽  
Kimitaka Nakazawa ◽  
...  


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ferran Cuenca‐Martínez ◽  
Álvaro Reina‐Varona ◽  
Juan Castillo‐García ◽  
Roy La Touche ◽  
Santiago Angulo‐Díaz‐Parreño ◽  
...  


2018 ◽  
Vol 38 ◽  
pp. 100-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Romano-Smith ◽  
G. Wood ◽  
D.J. Wright ◽  
C.J. Wakefield




2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (11) ◽  
pp. 1307-1316 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dennis Boye Larsen ◽  
Thomas Graven-Nielsen ◽  
Shellie Ann Boudreau


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document