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

The Effect of Motor Imagery Dosage on Motor Learning in Healthy Adults, A Pilot Study

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.

Study Overview

• Status: Completed
• Conditions: Healthy
• Intervention / Treatment: Other: NO motor imagery training; Other: Motor imagery training

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Actual): 27
• Phase: Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

Study Locations

• Egypt
  • Kafr Ash Shaykh, Egypt, 12623
    • Kafrelshaikh University
• United States
  • Wisconsin
    • Mequon, Wisconsin, United States, 53097
      • Concordia University Wisconsin

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: Adult
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: Yes

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

• 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.

Exclusion Criteria:

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

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: Other
• Allocation: Randomized
• Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
• Masking: Single

Number of Arms

3

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
Sham Comparator: control group (CG); 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; 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.
Experimental: low-dose group (LD); 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; 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).
Experimental: high-dose group (HD); 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; 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).

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
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.

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: Ahmed Mahmoud Kadry
• Collaborators: Concordia University Wisconsin
• Investigators: Principal Investigator: Ahmed M Kadry, PhD, Associate Professor of Physical Therapy, Kafrelsheikh University

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): March 1, 2022
• Primary Completion (Actual): April 20, 2022
• Study Completion (Actual): April 28, 2022

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: February 18, 2024
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: March 6, 2024
• First Posted (Actual): March 7, 2024

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): March 12, 2024
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: March 7, 2024
• Last Verified: March 1, 2024

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Keywords: Motor Learning; Motor Imagery; Dosage
• Other Study ID Numbers: 1870394-1

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

• Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?: YES
• IPD Plan Description: Data from this study, including individual participant data (IPD) and associated documentation, will be made available upon reasonable request to the principal investigator. Requests will be considered when accompanied by a detailed proposal, including a clear justification for the use of the data. Such requests will be subject to a review process to ensure compatibility with participant consent and the ethical guidelines governing the study. Data sharing will be facilitated under a data use agreement that specifies the terms and conditions to ensure the privacy and confidentiality of participants
• IPD Sharing Time Frame: 1 year from publication
• IPD Sharing Access Criteria: upon request from the principal investigator with appropriate justification
• IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type: STUDY_PROTOCOL; SAP

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No