Dataset Information

Modulating the motor system by action observation after stroke.

ABSTRACT: Much recent interest surrounds the use of action observation, which is observing another individual performing a motor task, in stroke rehabilitation, to promote motor recovery by engaging similar brain regions to action execution. This may be especially useful in individuals with limited mobility. Here, we assess how cortical motor activity during action observation is affected by stroke and by stroke-related motor deficits.We used functional MRI to compare brain activity during right and left hand action observation in right-handed nondisabled participants and participants who were right-handed before left hemisphere stroke. All participants performed the same actions after their functional MRI.Nondisabled participants show greater bilateral cortical motor activity when observing actions made using the left hand, whereas participants with stroke show greater ipsilesional cortical motor activity when observing actions made using the right (paretic) hand (P<0.05; corrected). For both groups, action processing is modulated by motor capability: cortical motor activity is greater when observing the hand with lower motor scores (P<0.05; corrected). Furthermore, for stroke, the extent of ipsilesional activity correlates with lesion volume (P=0.049), in a pattern that suggests adaptive plasticity.We found that action observation activates specific motor plans in damaged motor circuits after stroke, and this activity is related to motor capability to perform the same actions. Cortical motor activity during action observation may be relevant to motor learning, and to motor relearning in stroke rehabilitation.

SUBMITTER: Garrison KA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3753677 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Modulating the motor system by action observation after stroke.

Garrison Kathleen Alice KA Aziz-Zadeh Lisa L Wong Savio Waiho SW Liew Sook-Lei SL Winstein Carolee Joyce CJ

Stroke 20130606 8

<h4>Background and purpose</h4>Much recent interest surrounds the use of action observation, which is observing another individual performing a motor task, in stroke rehabilitation, to promote motor recovery by engaging similar brain regions to action execution. This may be especially useful in individuals with limited mobility. Here, we assess how cortical motor activity during action observation is affected by stroke and by stroke-related motor deficits.<h4>Methods</h4>We used functional MRI t ...[more]

PMID: 23743974

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAction observation (AO) is a physical rehabilitation approach that facilitates the occurrence of neural plasticity through the activation of the mirror-neural system, promoting motor recovery in people with stroke.ObjectivesTo assess whether AO enhances upper limb motor function in people with stroke.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched 18 May 2021), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (18 May 2021), MEDLINE (1946 to 18 May 2021), Embase (1974 to 18 May 2021), and five additional databases. We also searched trial registries and reference lists.Selection criteriaRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) of AO alone or associated with physical practice in adults after stroke. The primary outcome was upper limb (arm and hand) motor function. Secondary outcomes included dependence on activities of daily living (ADL), motor performance, cortical activation, quality of life, and adverse effects.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently selected trials according to the predefined inclusion criteria, extracted data, assessed risk of bias using RoB 1, and applied the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence. The reviews authors contacted trial authors for clarification and missing information.Main resultsWe included 16 trials involving 574 individuals. Most trials provided AO followed by the practice of motor actions. Training varied between 1 day and 8 weeks of therapy, 10 to 90 minutes per session. The time of AO ranged from 1 minute to 10 minutes for each motor action, task or movement observed. The total number of motor actions ranged from 1 to 3. Control comparisons included sham observation, physical therapy, and functional activity practice.Primary outcomesAO improved arm function (standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 0.61; 11 trials, 373 participants; low-certainty evidence); and improved hand function (mean difference (MD) 2.76, 95% CI 1.04 to 4.49; 5 trials, 178 participants; low-certainty evidence).Secondary outcomesAO did not improve ADL performance (SMD 0.37, 95% CI -0.34 to 1.08; 7 trials, 302 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or quality of life (MD 5.52, 95% CI -30.74 to 41.78; 2 trials, 30 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We were unable to pool the other secondary outcomes (motor performance and cortical activation). Only two trials reported adverse events without significant adverse effects.Authors' conclusionsThe effects of AO are small for arm function compared to any control group; for hand function the effects are large, but not clinically significant. For both, the certainty of evidence is low. There is no evidence of benefit or detriment from AO on ADL and quality of life of people with stroke; however, the certainty of evidence is very low. As such, our confidence in the effect estimate is limited because it will likely change with future research.

Project description:Following the discovery of Mirror Neuron System (MNS), Action Observation Training (AOT) has become an emerging rehabilitation tool to improve motor functions both in neurologic and orthopedic pathologies. The aim of this study is to present the state of the art on the use of AOT in experimental studies to improve motor function recovery in any disease. The research was performed in PubMed, PEDro, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (last search July 2015). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that analyse efficacy of AOT for recovery of motor functions, regardless of the kind of disease, were retrieved. The validity of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration tool for evaluating risk of bias. Twenty RCTs were eligible. Four studies showed AOT efficacy in improving upper limb functional recovery in participants with chronic stroke, two studies in sub-acute ones and one in acute ones. Six articles suggested its effectiveness on walking performance in chronic stroke individuals, and three of them also suggested an efficacy in improving balance. The use of AOT was also recommended in individuals with Parkinson's disease to improve autonomy in activities of daily living, to improve spontaneous movement rate of self-paced finger movements and to reduce freezing of gait. Other two studies also indicated that AOT improves upper limb motor function in children with cerebral palsy. The last two studies, showed the efficacy of AOT in improving motor recovery in postsurgical orthopedic participants. Overall methodological quality of the considered studies was medium. The majority of analyzed studies suggest the efficacy of AOT, in addition to conventional physiotherapy, to improve motor function recovery in individuals with neurological and orthopedic diseases. However, the application of AOT is very heterogeneous in terms of diseases and outcome measures assessed, which makes it difficult to reach, to date, any conclusion that might influence clinical practice.

Dataset Information

Modulating the motor system by action observation after stroke.

Publications

Modulating the motor system by action observation after stroke.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets