Practice Structure on Motor Learning in Post-Stroke Patients

This study has been completed.
Sponsor:
Information provided by:
University of Sao Paulo
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
NCT00604747
First received: January 17, 2008
Last updated: January 29, 2008
Last verified: January 2008
  Purpose

Background: The literature indicates that, in relation to motor learning, healthy subjects benefit more from random practice than from constant practice. However, this effect is not well known in post-stroke patients. Objective: The goal of this study was to investigate the effects of practice structure on motor learning in post-stroke patients. Methods: Participants included an experimental group (EG) of post-stroke patients: 17 males and females; and a control group (CG) of healthy individuals: 17 males and females. At the acquisition phase, all participants performed 30 trials of a coincident timing task. Nine individuals from each group practiced constantly (C) at a stimulus propagation speed of 3 mph, and eight from each group practiced randomly (R) at speeds of 2, 3, and 5 mph. Subsequent phases included: 1) transfer, 2) retention after 15 minutes, and 3) retention after 3 days. Each of these phases included 20 trials: 10 at a speed of 1 mph, and 10 at a speed of 4 mph. Intra- and inter-group comparisons were made employing an alpha level of 0.05 (5%).


Condition Intervention
Stroke
Other: Structure practice

Study Type: Interventional
Study Design: Intervention Model: Single Group Assignment
Masking: Open Label
Primary Purpose: Treatment
Official Title: The Effects of Practice Structure on Motor Learning in Post-Stroke Patients

Resource links provided by NLM:


Further study details as provided by University of Sao Paulo:

Primary Outcome Measures:
  • change in performance during the acquisition; performance exhibited during the transfer phase was maintained during retention phases 1 and 2; and differences between the groups during the transfer phase and retention phases [ Time Frame: time in miliseconds ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]

Enrollment: 34
Study Start Date: August 2006
Study Completion Date: July 2007
Primary Completion Date: July 2007 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure)
Arms Assigned Interventions
1, 2 Other: Structure practice
there were 2 groups which received random practice and constant practice during acquisition phase
Other Names:
  • experimental group (EG)
  • control group (CG)

Detailed Description:

Utilized was Bassin's anticipation timer (Lafayette Instruments #50575), which is comprised of a control screen, one 1.52 m gutter with 32 diodes placed on it linearly, and a response button. The screen has a digital display, with commands that permit the operator to control the stimulus propagation speed and the preparatory interval speed. Once activated, the screen exhibits an alert signal, and, after the preparatory interval, it initiates the propagation of a luminous stimulus, lighting the 32 diodes successively. The task required participants to press the response button simultaneously with the illumination of the last diode. The digital display showed the error measure (em): that is, the difference between the illumination of the last diode and the response.

  Eligibility

Ages Eligible for Study:   40 Years to 62 Years
Genders Eligible for Study:   Both
Accepts Healthy Volunteers:   Yes
Criteria

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. First cerebrovascular accident
  2. Lesion covering the middle and the anterior cerebral artery territories
  3. Presence of hemiplegia or hemiparesis
  4. Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score above 24 (19)
  5. Sufficient attention and comprehension to perform the task
  6. Absence of other associated neurological diseases.

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Acute medical problems
  2. Uncorrected vision loss
  3. Previous history of psychiatric admission
  4. History of multiple strokes, transient ischemic attacks
  5. Pathology of the less affected, ipsilateral to stroke upper extremity that would affect ability to perform the task
  6. Score of 23 or less on the MMSE
  7. Difficulty in comprehension of verbal command and simple instructions
  8. Aphasia of comprehension.
  Contacts and Locations
Choosing to participate in a study is an important personal decision. Talk with your doctor and family members or friends about deciding to join a study. To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the Contacts provided below. For general information, see Learn About Clinical Studies.

Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00604747

Locations
Brazil
Camila Torriani
São Paulo, SP, Brazil, 02415000
Sponsors and Collaborators
University of Sao Paulo
Investigators
Principal Investigator: Camila Torriani University of São Paulo
Study Chair: Camila Torriani University of São Paulo
  More Information

No publications provided

Responsible Party: Camila Torriani, University of São Paulo
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00604747     History of Changes
Other Study ID Numbers: 0038.0.254.000-05, 0038.0.254.000-05
Study First Received: January 17, 2008
Last Updated: January 29, 2008
Health Authority: Brazil: National Committee of Ethics in Research

Keywords provided by University of Sao Paulo:
motor learning
hemiplegia
stroke
practice
physiotherapy

Additional relevant MeSH terms:
Stroke
Cerebral Infarction
Cerebrovascular Disorders
Brain Diseases
Central Nervous System Diseases
Nervous System Diseases
Vascular Diseases
Cardiovascular Diseases
Brain Infarction
Brain Ischemia

ClinicalTrials.gov processed this record on September 22, 2014