Objectives: To investigate immediate changes in walking performance associated with three implicit motor learning strategies and to explore patient experiences of each strategy. Design: Participants were randomly allocated to one of three implicit motor learning strategies. Within-group comparisons of spatiotemporal parameters at baseline and post strategy were performed. Setting: Laboratory setting. Subjects: A total of 56 community-dwelling post-stroke individuals. Interventions: Implicit learning strategies were analogy instructions, environmental constraints and action observation. Different analogy instructions and environmental constraints were used to facilitate specific gait parameters. Within action observation, only videotaped gait was shown. Main measures: Spatiotemporal measures (speed, step length, step width, step height) were recorded using Vicon 3D motion analysis. Patient experiences were assessed by questionnaire. Results: At a group level, three of the four analogy instructions (n=19) led to small but significant changes in speed (d=0.088m/s), step height (affected side d=0.006m) and step width (d=–0.019m), and one environmental constraint (n=17) led to significant changes in step width (d=–0.040m). At an individual level, results showed wide variation in the magnitude of changes. Within action observation (n=20), no significant changes were found. Overall, participants found it easy to use the different strategies and experienced some changes in their walking performance. Conclusion: Analogy instructions and environmental constraints can lead to specific, immediate changes in the walking performance and were in general experienced as feasible by the participants. However, the response of an individual patient may vary quite considerably.
DOCUMENT
Objective. Clinicians may use implicit or explicit motor learning approaches to facilitatemotor learning of patients with stroke. Implicit motor learning approaches have shown promising results in healthy populations. The purpose of this study was to assess whether an implicit motor learning walking intervention is more effective compared with an explicit motor learning walking intervention delivered at home regarding walking speed in people after stroke in the chronic phase of recovery. Methods. This randomized, controlled, single-blind trial was conducted in the home environment. The 79 participants, who were in the chronic phase after stroke (age = 66.4 [SD = 11.0] years; time poststroke = 70.1 [SD = 64.3] months; walking speed = 0.7 [SD = 0.3] m/s; Berg Balance Scale score = 44.5 [SD = 9.5]), were randomly assigned to an implicit (n = 38) or explicit (n = 41) group. Analogy learning was used as the implicit motor learning walking intervention, whereas the explicit motor learning walking intervention consisted of detailed verbal instructions. Both groups received 9 training sessions (30 minutes each), for a period of 3 weeks, targeted at improving quality of walking. The primary outcome was walking speed measured by the 10-MeterWalk Test at a comfortable walking pace. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, immediately after intervention, and 1 month postintervention. Results. No statistically or clinically relevant differences between groups were obtained postintervention (between-group difference was estimated at 0.02 m/s [95% CI = −0.04 to 0.08] and at follow-up (between-group difference estimated at −0.02 m/s [95% CI = −0.09 to 0.05]). Conclusion. Implicit motor learning was not superior to explicit motor learning to improve walking speed in people after stroke in the chronic phase of recovery. Impact. To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine the effects of implicit compared with explicit motor learning on a functional task in people after stroke. Results indicate that physical therapists can use (tailored) implicit and explicit motor learning strategies to improve walking speed in people after stroke who are in the chronic phase of recovery.
DOCUMENT
Background: A significant part of neurological rehabilitation focuses on facilitating the learning of motor skills. Training can adopt either (more) explicit or (more) implicit forms of motor learning. Gait is one of the most practiced motor skills within rehabilitation in people after stroke because it is an important criterion for discharge and requirement for functioning at home. Objective: The aim of this study was to describe the design of a randomized controlled study assessing the effects of implicit motor learning compared with the explicit motor learning in gait rehabilitation of people suffering from stroke. Methods: The study adopts a randomized, controlled, single-blinded study design. People after stroke will be eligible for participation when they are in the chronic stage of recovery (>6 months after stroke), would like to improve walking performance, have a slow walking speed (<1 m/s), can communicate in Dutch, and complete a 3-stage command. People will be excluded if they cannot walk a minimum of 10 m or have other additional impairments that (severely) influence gait. Participants will receive 9 gait-training sessions over a 3-week period and will be randomly allocated to an implicit or explicit group. Therapists are aware of the intervention they provide, and the assessors are blind to the intervention participants receive. Outcome will be assessed at baseline (T0), directly after the intervention (T1), and after 1 month (T2). The primary outcome parameter is walking velocity. Walking performance will be assessed with the 10-meter walking test, Dynamic Gait Index, and while performing a secondary task (dual task). Self-reported measures are the Movement Specific Reinvestment Scale, verbal protocol, Stroke and Aphasia Quality of Life Scale, and the Global Perceived Effect scale. A process evaluation will take place to identify how the therapy was perceived and identify factors that may have influenced the effectiveness of the intervention. Repeated measures analyses will be conducted to determine significant and clinical relevant differences between groups and over time. Results: Data collection is currently ongoing and results are expected in 2019. Conclusions: The relevance of the study as well as the advantages and disadvantages of several aspects of the chosen design are discussed, for example, the personalized approach and choice of measurements.
DOCUMENT
The aim of this study was to assess the current state of evidence and methodological quality of studies on implicit and explicit motor learning in both typically developing children and children with developmental disorders. A systematic literature review was conducted on the experimental literature published up to April 2020. A total of 25 studies were included. Studies were evaluated on methodological quality, paradigm used, and level of evidence. The results showed that implicit paradigms are as effective as explicit paradigms in both groups of children. Studies are predominantly experimental in nature involving mostly upper limb aiming tasks. The few studies that were performed outside the lab (n = 5) suggest the superior efficacy of the implicit paradigm. Methodological quality varied between studies and was not always of sufficient standard to allow conclusions. In particular, manipulation checks were only performed in 13 studies (52% of all studies), limiting conclusions. Further progress can be made by focussing on improving methodological quality through retention testing by the inclusion of a control group, by the inclusion of a manipulation check, and via assessment of relevant co-variables, such as working memory, age, and motor competence.
DOCUMENT
There is a wide range of literature suggesting that implicit learning is more effective than explicit learning when acquiring motor skills. However, the acquisition of nursing skills in educational settings continues to rely heavily on detailed protocols and explicit instructions. This study aimed to examine the necessity for comprehensive protocols in the acquisition of nursing skills. In the context of bandaging techniques, three studies were conducted to investigate whether students who practiced with an instruction card containing minimal instructions (implicit group) performed comparably to the students who practiced with a protocol containing step-by-step instructions (explicit group). Study 1 was designed to determine whether both groups performed equally well in applying a bandage during training. Study 2 and 3 were designed to determine if both groups performed equally well during a retention and transfer (multitasking) test, administered after a series of three training sessions. In comparison with the explicit group, the implicit group demonstrated comparable performance with their practice attempts in Study 1 and performed equally well during the retention and transfer test in Study 2. Furthermore, several results from Study 3 indicated better performance of the implicit group. In conclusion, the use of protocols with explicit step-by-step instructions may not be essential for the acquisition of nursing skills. Instead, instructional methods that facilitate implicit learning may be preferable, as students in the implicit group demonstrated at least comparable performance in all studies and tended towards greater consistency when multitasking.
DOCUMENT
The main objective of this study was to influence implicit learning through two different classical manipulations and to inspect whether working memory capacity (WMC) and personality were related to the different measures of learning. With that purpose, in Experiment 1 we asked 172 undergraduate students of psychology to perform a serial reaction time (SRT) task under single- or dual-task conditions and to complete a WMC task and a personality test. In Experiment 2, 164 students performed the SRT task under incidental or intentional conditions and also filled a WMC task and a personality test. In both experiments, WMC influenced learning, but this relation was found only when attention was not loaded (Experiment 1) or when intentional instructions were given (Experiment 2). The pattern of relations with personality, although more varied, also showed a commonality between both experiments: learning under the most implicit conditions correlated positively with extraversion.
DOCUMENT
Background/Aims: Analogy learning, a motor learning strategy that uses biomechanical metaphors to chunk together explicit rules of a to-be-learned motor skill. This proof-of-concept study aims to establish the feasibility and potential benefits of analogy learning in enhancing stride length regulation in people with Parkinson’s. Methods: Walking performance of thirteen individuals with Parkinson’s was analysed using a Codamotion analysis system. An analogy instruction; “following footprints in the sand” was practiced over 8 walking trials. Single- and dual- (motor and cognitive) task conditions were measured before training, immediately after training and 4-weeks post training. Finally, an evaluation form was completed to examine the interventions feasibility. Findings: Data from 12 individuals (6 females and 6 males, mean age 70, Hoehn and Yahr I-III) were analysed, one person withdrew due to back problems. In the single task condition, statistically and clinically relevant improvements were obtained. A positive trend towards reducing dual task costs after the intervention was demonstrated, supporting the relatively implicit nature of the analogy. Participants reported that the analogy was simple to use and became easier over time. Conclusions: Analogy learning is a feasible and potentially implicit (i.e. reduced working memory demands) intervention to facilitate walking performance in people with Parkinson’s.
DOCUMENT
Background A variety of options and techniques for causing implicit and explicit motor learning have been described in the literature. The aim of the current paper was to provide clearer guidance for practitioners on how to apply motor learning in practice by exploring experts’ opinions and experiences, using the distinction between implicit and explicit motor learning as a conceptual departure point. Methods A survey was designed to collect and aggregate informed opinions and experiences from 40 international respondents who had demonstrable expertise related to motor learning in practice and/or research. The survey was administered through an online survey tool and addressed potential options and learning strategies for applying implicit and explicit motor learning. Responses were analysed in terms of consensus ( 70%) and trends ( 50%). A summary figure was developed to illustrate a taxonomy of the different learning strategies and options indicated by the experts in the survey.
MULTIFILE
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.
DOCUMENT
Background: Motor learning is central to domains such as sports and rehabilitation; however, often terminologies are insufficiently uniform to allow effective sharing of experience or translation of knowledge. A study using a Delphi technique was conducted to ascertain level of agreement between experts from different motor learning domains (i.e., therapists, coaches, researchers) with respect to definitions and descriptions of a fundamental conceptual distinction within motor learning, namely implicit and explicit motor learning. Methods: A Delphi technique was embedded in multiple rounds of a survey designed to collect and aggregate informed opinions of 49 international respondents with expertise related to motor learning. The survey was administered via an online survey program and accompanied by feedback after each round. Consensus was considered to be reached if $70% of the experts agreed on a topic. Results: Consensus was reached with respect to definitions of implicit and explicit motor learning, and seven common primary intervention strategies were identified in the context of implicit and explicit motor learning. Consensus was not reached with respect to whether the strategies promote implicit or explicit forms of learning. Discussion: The definitions and descriptions agreed upon may aid translation and transfer of knowledge between domains in the field of motor learning. Empirical and clinical research is required to confirm the accuracy of the definitions and to explore the feasibility of the strategies that were identified in research, everyday practice and education.
DOCUMENT
