Skip to content

Recovery of Hand Function Through Mental Practice.

Can Motor Imagery Enhance Recovery of Hand Function After Stroke? Evaluation of Motor Imagery Training.

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT00355836
Enrollment
135
Registered
2006-07-25
Start date
2004-11-30
Completion date
2007-02-28
Last updated
2015-11-05

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Stroke

Keywords

Motor Imagery, Stroke, Neuro-rehabilitation, health psychology, neuroscience, randomised controlled trial

Brief summary

The purpose of this study is to assess the therapeutic benefits of motor imagery training in stroke patients with persistent motor weakness.

Detailed description

Stroke is a common and highly debilitating illness. Many patients (41-45%) experience chronic motor impairments (Dijkerman et al., 1996) and limitations in activities of daily living (Wade & Langton Hewer, 1987) even after extensive neurological rehabilitation. They often result in long-term dependence at a considerable cost to the carers and the health service. It is therefore crucial to optimise motor recovery after stroke. This study investigates the therapeutic benefits of motor imagery training in stroke patients with a motor weakness. Evidence for the idea that motor imagery training could enhance the recovery of hand function comes from several separate bases of evidence: the sports literature; neurophysiological evidence; evidence from health psychology research; as well as preliminary findings using motor imagery techniques in stroke patients. There is evidence to suggest that mental rehearsal of movement can produce effects normally attributed to practising the actual movements. Imagining hand movements could stimulate the redistribution of brain activity, which accompanies recovery of hand function, thus resulting in a reduced motor deficit. Patients are assessed before and after a four-week evaluation period. In this randomised controlled trial 45 patients daily mentally rehearse movements with their affected hand under close supervision. Their recovery is compared to 45 patients who perform closely supervised non-motor mental rehearsal, and 45 patients who are not engaged in a training program.

Interventions

BEHAVIORALMental Imagery

Sponsors

Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government
CollaboratorOTHER_GOV
University of Aberdeen
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
FACTORIAL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

Confirmed diagnosis of stroke in the last 1-6 months Persisting upper limb weakness -

Exclusion criteria

Alcohol/ Drug abuse Psychiatric history Previous illness that has impacted on individuals Activity of Daily living \- Dementia (assessed by MSQ) Severe Aphasia

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) (Lyle, 1981)

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Grip strength (dynamometer; Heller et al., 1987),
Nine hole pegboard task (Mathiowetz et al., 1985, Wade [ref]),
Function Limitation Profile
Barthel Index
Recovery Locus of Control

Countries

United Kingdom

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026