Effect of Action Observation Therapy in the Rehabilitation of Neurologic and Musculoskeletal Conditions: A Systematic Review

Deirdre Ryan, Brona Fullen, Ebonie Rio, Ricardo Segurado, Diarmiad Stokes, Cliona O'Sullivan, Deirdre Ryan, Brona Fullen, Ebonie Rio, Ricardo Segurado, Diarmiad Stokes, Cliona O'Sullivan

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the effect of action observation therapy (AOT) in the rehabilitation of neurologic and musculoskeletal conditions.

Data sources: Searches were completed until July 2020 from the electronic databases Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (via OVID SP), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database.

Study selection: Randomized controlled trials comparing AOT with standard care were assessed. Musculoskeletal (amputee, orthopedic) and neurologic (dementia, cerebral palsy, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson disease, stroke) conditions were included. There were no age limitations. Articles had to be available in English.

Data extraction: Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full extracts of studies for eligibility and assessed the risk of bias of each study using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Data extraction included participant characteristics and intervention duration, frequency, and type.

Results: The effect of AOT in different outcome measures (OMs) was referenced in terms of body structures and functions, activities and participation, and environmental factors as outlined by the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). Of the 3448 articles identified, 36 articles with 1405 patients met the inclusion criteria. Seven of the 11 meta-analyses revealed a significant effect of intervention, with results presented using the mean difference and 95% CI. A best evidence synthesis was used across all OMs. Strong evidence supports the use of AOT in the rehabilitation of individuals with stroke and Parkinson disease; moderate evidence supports AOT in the rehabilitation of populations with orthopedic and multiple sclerosis diagnoses. However, moderate evidence is provided for and against the effect of AOT in persons with Parkinson disease and cerebral palsy.

Conclusions: This review suggests that AOT is advantageous in the rehabilitation of certain conditions in improving ICF domains. No conclusions can be drawn regarding treatment parameters because of the heterogeneity of the intervention. AOT has been considerably less explored in musculoskeletal conditions.

Keywords: 10MWT, 10-m walk test; ADL, activities of daily living; AHA, Assisting Hand Assessment; AOT, action observation therapy; BBS, Berg Balance Scale; BBT, Box and Block Test; FOG, freezing of gait; ICF, International Classification of Functioning Disability, and Health; MAS, Modified Ashworth Scale; MCID, minimum clinically important difference; MD, mean difference; MDC, minimal detectable change; MI, motor imagery; MNS, mirror neuron system; MUUL, Melbourne Assessment of Unilateral Upper Limb Function; Neuronal plasticity; OM, outcome measures; PDQ-39, 39-item Parkinson Disease Questionnaire; ROM, range of motion; Rehabilitation; RoB, risk of bias; SF-36, Short Form-36 Health Survey; Systematic review; TUG, Timed Up and Go; UPDRS, Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale; VAS, Visual Analog Scale; WOMAC, Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index.

© 2021 The Authors.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1
PRISMA flowchart. Abbreviations: AMED, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database; CINAHL, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health; PEDro, Physiotherapy Evidence Database; PRISMA, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.
Fig 2
Fig 2
Risk of bias.
Fig 3
Fig 3
Pooled analysis for the Tinetti scale in patients with orthopedic conditions.
Fig 4
Fig 4
Pooled analysis for the Berg Balance Scale in patients with Parkinson disease.
Fig 5
Fig 5
Pooled analysis for the FOG Questionnaire in patients with Parkinson disease.
Fig 6
Fig 6
Pooled analysis for the TUG in patients with Parkinson disease.
Fig 7
Fig 7
Pooled analysis for the 39-Item Parkinson Disease Questionnaire.
Fig 8
Fig 8
Pooled analysis for the BBT in patients with stroke.
Fig 9
Fig 9
Pooled analysis for the Fugl-Meyer Assessment in patients with stroke.
Fig 10
Fig 10
Pooled analysis for the Wolf Motor Function Test in patients with stroke.
Fig 11
Fig 11
Pooled analysis for the Modified Barthel Index in patients with stroke.
Fig 12
Fig 12
Pooled analysis for the TUG in patients with stroke.
Fig 13
Fig 13
Pooled analysis for the 10MWT in patients with stroke.

References

    1. Sallés L., Gironès X., Martín-Casas P., Lafuente J. A neurocognitive approach to recovery of movement following stoke. Phys Ther Rev. 2015;20:283–289.
    1. Pascual-Leone A., Amedi A., Fregni F., Merabet L.B. The plastic human brain cortex. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2005;28:377–401.
    1. Zanette G, Manganotti P, Fiaschi A, et al. Modulation of motor cortex excitability after upper limb immobilization. Clin Neurophys 12004;15:1264-1275.
    1. Mulder T. Motor imagery and action observation: cognitive tools for rehabilitation. J Neural Transm. 2007;114:1265–1278.
    1. Snodgrass S., Heneghan N., Tsao H. Recognising neuroplasticity in musculoskeletal rehabilitation: a basis for greater collaboration between musculoskeletal and neurological physiotherapists. Man Ther. 2014;19:614–617.
    1. Rizzolatti G., Craighero L. The mirror-neuron system. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2004;27:169–192.
    1. Di Pellegrino G., Fadiga L., Fogassi L. Understanding motor events: a neurophysiological study. Exp Brain Res. 1992;91:176–180.
    1. Fadiga L., Fogassi L., Pavesi G., Rizzolatti G. Motor facilitation during action observation: a magnetic stimulation study. J Neurophys. 1995;73:2608–2611.
    1. Rizzolatti G., Sinigaglia C. The functional role of the parieto-frontal mirror circuit: interpretations and misinterpretations. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2010;11:264–274.
    1. Sarasso E., Mariano G., Agosta F. Action observation training to improve motor function recovery: a systematic review. Arch Physiother. 2015;5:14–26.
    1. Higgins J.P., Green S. Cochrane Collaboration; 2011. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.1.0.
    1. Agosta F., Gatti R., Sarasso E. Brain plasticity in Parkinson’s disease with freezing of gait induced by action observation training. J Neurol. 2017;264:88–101.
    1. Bae S., Kim K.Y. Dual-afferent sensory input training for voluntary movement after stroke: a pilot randomized controlled study. NeuroRehabil. 2017;40:293–300.
    1. Bang D.H., Shin W.S., Kim S.Y. The effects of action observational training on walking ability in chronic stroke patients: a double-blind randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehab. 2013;27:1118–1125.
    1. Belleli G., Buccino G., Bernardini B. Action observation treatment improves recovery of postsurgical orthopaedic patients: evidence for a top-down effect? Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2010;91:1489–1494.
    1. Buccino G., Arisi D., Gough P. Improving upper limb motor functions through action observation treatment: a pilot study in children with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2012;54:822–828.
    1. Buccino G., Molinaro A., Ambrosi C. Action observation treatment improves upper limb motor functions in children with cerebral palsy: a combined clinical and brain imaging study. Neur Plas. 2018;2018:4843985.
    1. Cowles T., Clark A., Mares K. Observation-to-imitate plus practice could add little to physical therapy benefits within 31 days of stroke: translation randomized controlled trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2013;27:173–182.
    1. Eggermont L., Swaab D., Hol E. Observation of hand movements by older persons with dementia: effects on cognition. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2009;27:366–374.
    1. Franceshini M., Gabriella C., Agosti M. Clinical relevance of action observation in upper-limb stroke rehabilitation: a possible role in recovery of functional dexterity. A randomized clinical trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2012;26:456–462.
    1. Fu J., Zeng M., Shen F. Effects of action observation therapy on upper extremity function, daily activities and notion evoked potential in cerebral infarction patients. Med. 2017;96:1–6.
    1. Hsieh Yw, Lin Y.H., Wu C.Y., Lin Y.P., Chen C.C. Treatment effects of upper limb action observation therapy and mirror therapy on rehabilitation outcomes after subacute stroke: a pilot study. Behav Neurol. 2020;2020:6250524.
    1. Jaywant A., Ellis T., Roy S. A randomized controlled trial of a home-based action observation intervention to improve walking in Parkinson disease. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2016;97:665–673.
    1. Jeong Ya, Lee B.H. Effect of action observation training on spasticity, gross motor function, and balance in children with diplegia cerebral palsy. Children. 2020;7:1–10.
    1. Kim C.H., Bang D.H. Action observation training enhances upper extremity function in subacute stroke survivor with moderate impairment: a double-blind, randomized controlled pilot trial. J Korean Soc Phys Med. 2016;11 133-14.
    1. Kim E., Kim K. Effect of purposeful action observation on upper extremity function in stroke patients. J Phys Ther Sci. 2015;27:2867–2869.
    1. Kim J.H., Lee B.H. Action observation training for functional activities after stroke: a pilot randomized controlled trial. NeuroRehabil. 2013;33:565–574.
    1. Kim J.C., Lee H.M. The effect of action observation training on balance and sit to walk in chronic stroke: a crossover randomized controlled trial. J Mot Behav. 2018;50:373–380.
    1. Kirkpatrick E., Pearse J., James P. Effect of parent-delivered action observation therapy on upper limb function in unilateral cerebral palsy: a randomized controlled trial. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2016;58:1049–1056.
    1. Lee H.J., Kim Y.M., Lee D.K. The effects of action observation training and mirror therapy on gait and balance in stroke patients. J Phys Ther Sci. 2017;29:523–526.
    1. Mezzarooba S., Grassi M., Pellegrini L. Action observation plus sonification. a novel therapeutic protocol for Parkinson’s patient with freezing of gait. Front Neurol. 2018;8:1–13.
    1. Moon Y., Bae Y. Backward walking observational training improves gait ability in patients with chronic stroke: randomised controlled pilot study. Int J Rehabil Res. 2019;42:217–222.
    1. Park E.C., Hwangbo G. The effects of action observation gait training on the static balance and walking ability of stroke patients. J Phys Ther Sci. 2015;27:341–344.
    1. Park H.J., Oh D.W., Choi J.D. Action observation training of community ambulation for improving walking ability of patients with post-stroke hemiparesis: a randomized controlled pilot trial. Clin Rehabil. 2017;31:1078–1086.
    1. Park H.R., Kim J.M., Lee M.K. Clinical feasibility of action observation training for walking function of patients with post-stroke hemiparesis: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil. 2014;28:794–803.
    1. Park S.D., Song H.S., Kim J.Y. The effect of action observation training on knee joint function and gait ability in total knee replacement patients. J Exerc Rehabil. 2014;10:168–171.
    1. Pelosin E., Avanzino L., Bove M. Action observation improves freezing of gait in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010;24:746–752.
    1. Pelosin E., Barella R., Bet C. Effect of group-based rehabilitation combining action observation with physiotherapy on freezing of gait in Parkinson’s disease. Neural Plast. 2018;2018:4897246.
    1. Rocca M., Meani A., Fumagalli S. Functional and structural plasticity following action observation training in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2018;25:1472–1487.
    1. Sale P., Ceravolo M., Franceshini M. Action observation therapy in subacute phase promotes dexterity recovery in right-hemisphere stroke patients. BioMed Res Int. 2014;2014:457538.
    1. Sgandurra G., Ferrari A., Cossu G. Randomized trial of observation and execution of upper extremity actions versus action alone in children with unilateral cerebral palsy. Neuro Rehabil Neural Repair. 2013;27:808–815.
    1. Simon-Martinez C., Mailleux L., Hoskens J. Randomized controlled trial combining constraint-induced movement therapy and action-observation training in unilateral cerebral palsy: clinical effects and influencing factors of treatment response. Ther Adv Neurol Disord. 2020;13 1756286419898065.
    1. Son Y.L., Kim J.W. The effects of mirror neuron system-based self-observation training on lower limb muscle activity and dynamic balance in patients with chronic stroke. J Phys Ther Sci. 2018;30:1241–1244.
    1. Tung M., Murphy I., Griffin S. Observation of limb movements reduces phantom limb pain in bilateral amputees. Ann Clin Transl Neurol. 2014;1:633–638.
    1. Villafañe J.H., Isgrò M., Borsatti M. Effects of action observation treatment in recovery after total knee replacements: a prospective clinical trial. Clin Rehab. 2017;31:361–368.
    1. Zhu M.H., Wang J., Shi M.F. Effect of action observation therapy on daily activities and motor recovery in stroke patients. Int J Nurs Sci. 2015;2:279–282.
    1. Zhu M.H., Zeng M., Shi M.F., Shen F., Zheng Y.P., Jia Y.P. Visual feedback therapy for restoration of upper limb function of stroke patients. Int J Nurs Sci. 2020;7:170–178.
    1. McGuinness L.A., Higgins J.P.T. Risk-of-bias VISualization (robvis): an R package and shiny web app for visualizing risk-of-bias assessments. Res Syn Meth. 2021;12:55–61.
    1. World Health Organization . World Health Organization; Geneva, Switzerland: 2001. International classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF)
    1. van Tulder M., Furlan A., Bombardier C. Updated method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane collaboration back review group. Spine. 2003;8:1290–1299.
    1. Losana-Ferrer A., Manzanas- López S., Cuenca-Martínez F. Effects of motor imagery and action observation on hand grip strength, electromyographic activity and intramuscular oxygenation in the hand gripping gesture: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Mov Sci. 2018;58:119–131.
    1. Strand L., Ljunggren A., Bogen B., Ask T., Johnsen T. The Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire as an outcome measure: test-retest reliability and responsiveness to change. Eur J Pain. 2008;12:917–925.
    1. Tubach F., Ravaud P., Baron G. Evaluation of clinically relevant changes in patient reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: the minimal clinically important difference. Ann Rheum Dis. 2005;64:29–33.
    1. Parveen H., Noohu M. Evaluation of psychometric properties of Tinetti performance-orientated mobility assessment scale in subjects with knee osteoarthritis. Hong Kong Physiother J. 2017;36:25–32.
    1. Fiorvanti A., Pettit S., Woodhouse L. Comparing the responsiveness of the assessment of motor and process skills and the Functional Independence Measure. Can J Occup Ther. 2012;79:167–174.
    1. Yuksel E., Kalkan S., Cekmece S., Unver B., Karatsun V. Assessing minimal detectable changes and test-retest reliability of the timed Up and Go test and the 2-minute walk test in patients with total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2017;32:426–430.
    1. Holmefur M., Aaarts P., Hoare B., Krumlinde-Sundhol L. Test-retest and alternate forms of reliability of the assisting hand assessment. J Rehabil Med. 2009;41:886–891.
    1. Klingels K., De Cock P., Desloovere K. Comparison of the Melbourne Assessment of Unilateral Upper Limb Function and the Quality of Upper Extremity Skills Test in hemiplegic CP. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2008;50:904–909.
    1. Draak T., Prupper M., van Nes S. Grip strength comparison in immune-mediated neuropathies: Vigorimeter vs. Jamar. J Periper Nerv Syst. 2015;20:269–276.
    1. Godi M., Franchignoni F., CaligariM, Giordano A., Turcato A., Nardone A. Comparison of reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Mini-Bestest and Berg Balance Scale in patients with balance disorders. Phys Ther. 2013;93:158–167.
    1. Steffen T., Seney M. Test-retest reliability and minimal detectable change on balance and ambulation tests, the 36-item Short Form Health Survey, and the Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale in people with parkinsonism. Phys Ther. 2008;88:733–746.
    1. Horvath K., Aschermann Z., Marton K. Changes in quality of life in Parkinson’s disease: how large must they be to be relevant? Neuroepidemiology. 2018;48:1–8.
    1. Chen C.L., Chen C.Y., Chen H.S. Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference of Modified Ashworth Scale in patients with stroke. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2019;55:754–760.
    1. Chen H.M., Chen C., Hsueh I.P., Huang S.L., Hsieh C.L. Test-retest reproducibility and smallest real difference of 5 hand function tests in patients with stroke. Neurorehab Neural Repair. 2009;23:435–440.
    1. Wagner J., Rhodes J., Patten C. Reproducibility and minimal detectable change of three- dimensional kinematic analysis of reaching tasks in people with hemiparesis after stroke. Phys Ther. 2008;88:652–663.
    1. Lin K.C., Hsieh Y.W., Wu C.Y., Chen C.L., Hang Y., Liu J.S. Minimal detectable change and clinically important different of the Wolf Motor Function Test in stroke patients. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009;23:429–434.
    1. Hsieh Y.W., Wang C.H., Wu S.C., Chen P.C., Sheu C.F., Hsieh C.L. Establishing the minimal clinically important difference of the Barthel Index in stroke patients. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2007;21:233–238.
    1. Alghadir A., Al-Elsa E., Anwer S., Sarkar B. Reliability, validity and responsiveness of three scales for measuring balance in patients in chronic stroke. BMC Neurol. 2018;18:1–7.
    1. Hiengkaew V., Jitaree K., Chaiyawat P. Minimal detectable changes of the Berg Balance Scale, Fugl-Meyer Assessment Scale, timed “Up & Go” test, gait speeds and 2-minute walk test in individuals with chronic stroke with different degrees of ankle plantar flexor tone. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;93:1201–1208.
    1. Tang A., Eng J., Rand D. Relationship between perceived and measured changes in walking after stroke. J Neurol Phys Ther. 2012;36:115–121.
    1. Page P. Beyond Statistical significance: clinical interpretation of rehabilitation research literature. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2014;9:726–736.
    1. Jesus-Ribeiro J., Vieira E., Ferreira P., Januario C., Freire A. Reliability and validity of 39-item Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire and Parkinson’s Disease Quality of Life Questionnaire. Acta Med Port. 2017;30:393–401.
    1. Giladi N., Tal J., Azulay T. Validation of the Freezing of Gait Questionnaire in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Mov Disord. 2009;24:655–661.
    1. Sanford J., Moreland J., Swanson L., Stratford P., Gowland C. Reliability of the Fugl-Meyer assessment for testing motor performance in patients following stroke. Phys Ther. 1993;73:447–454.
    1. Hsueh I.P., Lee M.M., Hsieh C.L. Psychometric characteristics of the Barthel activities of daily living index in stroke patients. J Formos Med Assoc. 2001;100:526–532.
    1. Roos E., Klassbo M., Lohmander L. WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index. Scand J Rheumatol. 1999;28:201–205.
    1. Dodds A., Martin D., Stolov W., Deyo R. A validation of the Functional Independence Measurement and its performance among rehabilitation inpatients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1993;74:531–536.
    1. Calvo-Merino B., Glaser D.E., Grèzes J. Action observation and acquired motor skills: an fMRI study with expert dancers. Cereb Cortex. 2005;15:1243–1249.
    1. Binkofski F., Buccino G. The role of ventral premotor cortex in action execution and action understanding. J Physiol. 2006;99:396–405.
    1. Farina E., Baglio F., Pomati S. The mirror neurons network in aging, mild cognitive impairment, and Alzheimer disease: a functional MRI study. Front Aging Neurosci. 2017;9:1–13.
    1. Eaves D., Riach M., Jolmes P. Motor imagery during action observation: a brief review of evidence, theory and future research opportunities. Front Neurosci. 2016;10:1–10.
    1. Sakadjan A., Panchuk D., Pearce A. Kinematic and kinetic improvements associated with action observation facilitated learning of the power clean in Australian footballers. J Stren Cond Res. 2014;28:1613–1625.
    1. Pelletier R., Higgins J., Bourbonnais D. Addressing neuroplastic changes in distributed areas of the nervous system associated with chronic musculoskeletal disorders. Phys Ther. 2015;95:1582–1591.

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi