Movement is an essential part of our lives. Throughout our lifetime, we acquire many different motor skills that are necessary to take care of ourselves (e.g., eating, dressing), to work (e.g., typing, using tools, care for others) and to pursue our hobbies (e.g., running, dancing, painting). However, as a consequence of aging, trauma or chronic disease, motor skills may deteriorate or become “lost”. Learning, relearning, and improving motor skills may then be essential to maintain or regain independence. There are many different ways in which the process of learning a motor skill can be shaped in practice. The conceptual basis for this thesis was the broad distinction between implicit and explicit forms of motor learning. Physiotherapists and occupational therapists are specialized to provide therapy that is tailored to facilitate the process of motor learning of patients with a wide range of pathologies. In addition to motor impairments, patients suffering from neurological disorders often also experience problems with cognition and communication. These problems may hinder the process of learning at a didactic level, and make motor learning especially challenging for those with neurological disorders. This thesis focused on the theory and application of motor learning during rehabilitation of patients with neurological disorders. The overall aim of this thesis was to provide therapists in neurological rehabilitation with knowledge and tools to support the justified and tailored use of motor learning in daily clinical practice. The thesis is divided into two parts. The aim of the first part (Chapters 2‐5) was to develop a theoretical basis to apply motor learning in clinical practice, using the implicit‐explicit distinction as a conceptual basis. Results of this first part were used to develop a framework for the application of motor learning within neurological rehabilitation (Chapter 6). Afterwards, in the second part, strategies identified in first part were tested for feasibility and potential effects in people with stroke (Chapters 7 and 8). Chapters 5-8 are non-final versions of an article published in final form in: Chapter 5: Kleynen M, Moser A, Haarsma FA, Beurskens AJ, Braun SM. Physiotherapists use a great variety of motor learning options in neurological rehabilitation, from which they choose through an iterative process: a retrospective think-aloud study. Disabil Rehabil. 2017 Aug;39(17):1729-1737. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2016.1207111. Chapter 6: Kleynen M, Beurskens A, Olijve H, Kamphuis J, Braun S. Application of motor learning in neurorehabilitation: a framework for health-care professionals. Physiother Theory Pract. 2018 Jun 19:1-20. doi: 10.1080/09593985.2018.1483987 Chapter 7: Kleynen M, Wilson MR, Jie LJ, te Lintel Hekkert F, Goodwin VA, Braun SM. Exploring the utility of analogies in motor learning after stroke: a feasibility study. Int J Rehabil Res. 2014 Sep;37(3):277-80. doi: 10.1097/MRR.0000000000000058. Chapter 8: Kleynen M, Jie LJ, Theunissen K, Rasquin SM, Masters RS, Meijer K, Beurskens AJ, Braun SM. The immediate influence of implicit motor learning strategies on spatiotemporal gait parameters in stroke patients: a randomized within-subjects design. Clin Rehabil. 2019 Apr;33(4):619-630. doi: 10.1177/0269215518816359.
Background: Treatment of temporomandibular disorder (TMD) currently consists of a combination of noninvasive therapies and may be supported by e-Health. It is, however, unclear if physical therapists and patients are positive towards the use of e-Health. Purpose: To assess the needs, facilitators and barriers of the use of an e-Health application from the perspective of both orofacial physical therapists and patients with TMD. Methods: A descriptive qualitative study was performed. Eleven physical therapists and nine patients with TMD were interviewed using a topic guide. Thematic analysis was applied, and findings were ordered according to four themes: acceptance of e-Health, expected utility, usability and convenience. Results: Physical therapists identified the need for e-Health as a supporting application to send questionnaires, animated exercises and evaluation tools. Key facilitators for both physical therapists and patients for implementing e-Health included the increase in self-efficacy, support of data collection and personalization of the application. Key barriers are the increase of screen time, the loss of personal contact, not up-to-date information and poor design of the application. Conclusions: Physical therapists and patients with TMD are positive towards the use of e-Health, in a blended form with the usual rehabilitation care process for TMD complaints.Implications for rehabilitation The rehabilitation process of temporomandibular complaints may be supported by the use of e-Health applications. Physical therapists and patients with temporomandibular disorders are positive towards the use of e-Health as an addition to the usual care. Especially during the treatment process, there is a need for clear animated videos and reminders for the patients.
The aim of the present study was to investigate the nature and prevalence of nonspecific somatic symptoms, pain and catastrophizing in children with Heritable Connective Tissue Disorders (HCTD), and to determine their association with disability. This observational, multicenter study included 127 children, aged 4–18 years, with Marfan syndrome (MFS) (59%), Loeys-Dietz syndrome (LDS) (8%), Ehlers-Danlos syndromes (EDS) (12%) and hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (hEDS) (23%). The assessments included the Children's Somatization Inventory or parent proxy (CSI, PCSI), pain visual-analogue scale (VAS), SUPERKIDZ body diagram, Pain Catastrophizing Scale Child or parent proxy (PCS-C, PCS-P) and Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire (CHAQ-30). Data from children aged ≥8 years were compared to normative data. In children ≥ 8 years (n = 90), pain was present in 59%, with a median of 4 (IQR = 3–9) pain areas. Compared to normative data, the HCTD group reported significantly higher on the CSI (p ≤ 0.001, d = 0.85), VAS pain intensity (p ≤ 0.001, d = 1.22) and CHAQ-30 (p ≤ 0.001, d = 1.16) and lower on the PCS-C (p = 0.017, d = −0.82) and PCS-P (p ≤ 0.001, d = −0.49). The intensity of nonspecific somatic symptoms and pain explained 45% of the variance in disability (r2 = 0.45 F(2,48) = 19.70, p ≤ 0.001). In children ≤ 7 years (n = 37), pain was present in 35% with a median of 5(IQR = 1–13) pain areas. The mean(SD) VAS scores for pain intensity was 1.5(2.9). Functional disability was moderately correlated to the number of pain areas (r = 0.56, p ≤ 0.001), intensity of nonspecific somatic symptoms (r = 0.63, p ≤ 0.001) and pain (r = 0.83, p ≤ 0.001). In conclusion, this study supports the need for comprehensive assessment of nonspecific somatic symptoms, pain, and disability in children with HCTD to allow tailored treatment.
