Abstract
The present work is the first study that assess long run change after motor learning. The study’s main objective was to evaluate the short to medium-term impact of motor imagery (MI) and action observation (AO) on motor learning of a sequence of thumb-opposition tasks of increasing complexity. We randomly assigned 45 participants to an AO, MI, or placebo observation (PO) group. A sequence of 12 thumb-opposition tasks was taught for 3 consecutive days (4 per day). The primary outcome was accuracy. The secondary outcomes were required time and perfect positioning. The outcomes were assessed immediately after the intervention and at 1 week, 1 month and 4 months postintervention. Regarding the primary outcome, AO group had significantly higher accuracy than the MI or PO group until at least 4 months (p < 0.01, d > 0.80). However, in the bimanual positions, AO was not superior to MI at 1 week postintervention. Regarding secondary outcomes, AO group required less time than the MI group to remember and perform the left-hand and both-hand gestures, with a large effect size (p < 0.01, d > 0.80). In terms of percentage of perfect positions, AO group achieved significantly better results than the MI group until at least 4 months after the intervention in the unimanual gestures (p < 0.01, d > 0.80) and up to 1 month postintervention in the bimanual gestures (p = 0.012, d = 1.29). AO training resulted in greater and longer term motor learning than MI and placebo intervention. If the goal is to learn some motor skills for whatever reason (e.g., following surgery or immobilization.), AO training should be considered clinically.
Highlights
The present work is the first study that assess long run change after motor learning
The post hoc analysis showed that the motor imagery (MI) and action observation (AO) groups showed statistically significant differences compared with the placebo observation (PO) postintervention (p < 0.001; d = 2.65, and d = 4.78, respectively), 1 week postintervention (p < 0.001; d = 1.94, and d = 4.45, respectively) and 1 month postintervention (p < 0.001; d = 1.58, and d = 2.90, respectively), with a large effect size
The post hoc analysis showed that the MI and AO groups showed statistically significant differences compared with the PO group postintervention (p < 0.01; d = 1.23, and d = 2.97, respectively), 1 week postintervention (p < 0.01; d = 1.18, and d = 3.06, respectively) and 1 month postintervention (p < 0.01; d = 1.08, and d = 2.44, respectively), with a large effect size
Summary
The present work is the first study that assess long run change after motor learning. In terms of percentage of perfect positions, AO group achieved significantly better results than the MI group until at least 4 months after the intervention in the unimanual gestures (p < 0.01, d > 0.80) and up to 1 month postintervention in the bimanual gestures (p = 0.012, d = 1.29). Neuroimaging studies have revealed that, during mental practice, there is neurophysiological activation of the brain areas involved in the planning and execution of voluntary movement (primary motor cortex, supplementary motor area, cerebellum, premotor area, the inferior and superior parietal lobule and the basal ganglia) similar to the processes when the movement is p erformed[4,5]. Previous studies have shown that AO can lead to the motor learning of gestures observed from the visual information acquired, even without their actual e xecution[15]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
