The Effect of Motor Imagery Dosage on Motor Learning in Healthy Adults

NCT06299345 | Completed

• 1 other identifier: 1870394-1
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 27
• Locations: 2 countries
• Sites: 2

Brief Summary

The goal of this clinical trial is to compare the effects of different durations of Motor Imagery (MI) practice and physical practice on motor performance enhancement in healthy adults. The main questions it aims to answer are:

• Does Motor Imagery (MI) practice improve motor performance?
• How do different doses of MI practice (low vs. high) compare to no MI practice in enhancing motor performance? Participants:
• Be randomly assigned to one of three groups: no MI practice (control group), low dose MI practice (6 minutes per session), or high dose MI practice (12 minutes per session).
• Complete nine sessions over three weeks, practicing a timed mirror tracing task.
• Have their performance measured in each session by the time taken to complete the task and the number of errors made. Compared the control group, low dose MI group, and high dose MI group to see if there are significant differences in motor performance enhancement, aiming to determine the effectiveness of MI and the optimal dose for practice.

Conditions

Healthy

Keywords

Motor Imagery; Dosage; Motor Learning

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (2)

• Time

  The time to complete the physical tracing task was measured from when the investigator said 'GO' until the participant returned the pen to the starting point. The physical tracing task is a mirror tracing game that requires participants to trace a star shape viewed through a mirror, going as fast as possible while staying within the lines.

  Time was measured at the end of each session, with intervals of 3 session/week for 3 weeks with total of 9 sessions. So, the research ended up with 9 reading for the time.

• Errors

  Errors were operationally defined as each time the pen went outside of the shape lines while doing the physical tracing task. Crossing a line and returning to the original trace was counted as one error. Errors were counted by the number of times the pen went outside the lines.

  Errors were counted at the end of each session, with intervals of 3 session/week for 3 weeks with total of 9 sessions. So, the research ended up with 9 reading for the time.

Study Arms (3)

control group (CG)

SHAM COMPARATOR

Physically performed the task once per session. No MI. The physical task is a mirror tracing game that requires participants to trace a star shape viewed through a mirror, going as fast as possible while staying within the lines.

Other: NO motor imagery training

low-dose group (LD)

EXPERIMENTAL

In addition to physically performing the motor task once in session 1, then they performed MI for 6 minutes (2 min x 3 sets) per session. MI for this study took the form of non-guided first-person mental practice. First-person imagery was explained to each participant where they imagined performing the target skill through their own eyes rather than if they were a bystander watching someone else do the task (third person).

Other: Motor imagery training

high-dose group (HD)

EXPERIMENTAL

In addition to physically performing the motor task once in session 1, then MI for 12 minutes (2 min x 6 sets) per session. The MI technique was the same as the LD group.

Other: Motor imagery training

Interventions

Motor imagery training OTHER

MI for this study took the form of non-guided first-person mental practice. First-person imagery was explained to each participant where they imagined performing the target skill through their own eyes rather than if they were a bystander watching someone else do the task (third person).

high-dose group (HD); low-dose group (LD)

NO motor imagery training OTHER

The participants performed the physical task only. It is a mirror tracing game that requires participants to trace a star shape viewed through a mirror, going as fast as possible while staying within the lines.

control group (CG)

Eligibility Criteria

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

You may qualify if:

• no history of motor dysfunction, coordination disorders, or surgical procedures in the past 6 months
• scored 4 or less on the Movement Imagery Questionnaire (MIQ) on the non-dominant hand.

You may not qualify if:

• Played the target task in the past 6 months
• Subjects were ambidextrous

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Ahmed Mahmoud Kadry: lead
• Concordia University Wisconsin: collaborator

Study Sites (2)

Concordia University Wisconsin

Mequon, Wisconsin, 53097, United States

Location

Kafrelshaikh University

Kafr ash Shaykh, 12623, Egypt

Location

Study Officials

• Ahmed M Kadry, PhD

  Associate Professor of Physical Therapy, Kafrelsheikh University

  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: SINGLE
• Who Masked: PARTICIPANT
• Masking Details: The participants were blinded about which group they were allocated (control or intervention)
• Purpose: OTHER
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: SPONSOR INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Associate Professor of Physical Therapy

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: February 18, 2024
• First Posted: March 7, 2024
• Study Start: March 1, 2022
• Primary Completion: April 20, 2022
• Study Completion: April 28, 2022
• Last Updated: March 12, 2024

Record last verified: 2024-03

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will share
• Shared Documents: STUDY PROTOCOL, SAP
• Time Frame: 1 year from publication
• Access Criteria: upon request from the principal investigator with appropriate justification

Locations

EG (1); US (1)