Ipsilateral Transfer of Motor Skill From Upper to Lower Limb in Healthy Adults

NCT05748769 | Unknown

• 1 other identifier: AU-HEA-OE-20210610-B
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 60
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

To determine whether there is an ipsilateral transfer of a motor skill from the upper limb to the lower limb

Conditions

Healthy

Keywords

ipsilateral transfer; motor performance; Upper limb; Lower limb; reaching sequence

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (3)

• Response Time (msec.)

  Change in response time (msec.) from pretest to posttest. Activation of a specific unit LED was a cue for the subject to reach toward that unit and press the push-button switch. Reaching toward the switch of an activated unit deactivated it, and the response time, between the activated and deactivated LED, was recorded. Improved motor performance was indicated by a shorter Response Time

  Pretest - before the training session, posttest - immediately after the training session

• Response Time (msec.)

  Change in response time (msec.) from posttest to retest. Activation of a specific unit LED was a cue for the subject to reach toward that unit and press the push-button switch. Reaching toward the switch of an activated unit deactivated it, and the response time, between the activated and deactivated LED, was recorded. Improved motor performance was indicated by a shorter Response Time

  Posttest - immediately after the training session, retest - 24 hours after the training session

• Response Time (msec.)

  Change in response time (msec.) from pretest to retest. Activation of a specific unit LED was a cue for the subject to reach toward that unit and press the push-button switch. Reaching toward the switch of an activated unit deactivated it, and the response time, between the activated and deactivated LED, was recorded. Improved motor performance was indicated by a shorter Response Time

  Pretest - before the training session, retest - 24 hours after the training session

Secondary Outcomes (3)

• % of fails

  Pretest - before the training session, posttest - immediately after the training session

• % of fails

  Posttest - immediately after the training session, retest - 24 hours after the training session

• % of fails

  Pretest - before the training session, retest - 24 hours after the training session

Study Arms (3)

UL group

EXPERIMENTAL

SIngle session of practicing RM sequence with the UL towards illuminating switches

Behavioral: Practice (UL)

Switches observation - SO group

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

Single session of observation of sequence of illuminating switches

Behavioral: Observation (SO)

(Nature observation -NO group

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

Single session of observation of nature movies

Behavioral: Nature Observation (NO)

Interventions

Practice (UL) BEHAVIORAL

Subjects performed RMs toward the units that were activated in the same order as the tested sequence 1-4-3-5-4-2, and with an activation duration and delay of 1 s. The practice included 16 blocks, each consisting of 30 RM with a 30 s pause after each block

UL group

Observation (SO) BEHAVIORAL

Subjects observed the illuminating switches while avoiding moving. The subjects observed RMs toward the units that were activated in the same order as the practiced sequence 1-4-3-5-4-2, also with an activation duration and delay of 1 s and 30 s pause after each block.

Switches observation - SO group

Nature Observation (NO) BEHAVIORAL

The video-clip consisted of a 16 min nature movie in cycles of one-minute observation and pausing 30 s, equivalent to the timing of RMs performed by groups UL and SO

(Nature observation -NO group

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 20 Years - 35 Years
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64)

You may qualify if:

• Healthy (self report)
• right hand dominant

You may not qualify if:

• musculoskeletal or neurological deficits interfering with task performance (proper upper limb and lower limb reaching performance)

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Ariel University: lead

Study Sites (1)

Ariel University

Ariel, Israel

Location

MeSH Terms

Interventions

Observation

Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Methods; Investigative Techniques

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: SINGLE
• Who Masked: PARTICIPANT
• Purpose: OTHER
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: SPONSOR

Model Details: Randomized control trial (RCT)

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: February 19, 2023
• First Posted: March 1, 2023
• Study Start: January 17, 2022
• Primary Completion: September 20, 2022
• Study Completion: September 1, 2023
• Last Updated: March 29, 2023

Record last verified: 2023-02

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

IL (1)