Exercise, Pain
Conditions
Keywords
Motor Imagery, Action observation, Visual mirror feedback, Pain pressure thresholds
Brief summary
The main objective of the present study was to evaluate the effects of action observation (AO), visual mirror feedback (VMF), motor imagery (MI) combined with an orofacial exercise program in asymptomatic subjects.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALExercise plus action observation
Orofacial exercise plus action observation (video) of the same exercise
BEHAVIORALExercise plus motor imagery
Orofacial exercise plus motor imagery of the same exercise
BEHAVIORALExercise plus visual mirror feedback
Exercise plus visual mirror feedback
BEHAVIORALExercise
Orofacial exercises
Sponsors
Universidad Autonoma de Madrid
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
QUADRUPLE (Subject, Caregiver, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
1. healthy individuals with no pain 2. aged between 18 and 65 years 3. subjects with correct masticatory function and labial and lingual mobility
Exclusion criteria
1. individuals who presented systemic, cardiorespiratory, central nervous system or rheumatic diseases, or those who presented any musculoskeletal or craniocervical pathology 2. underage individuals 3. individuals with orofacial pain or temporomandibular disorders at the time of the study; (d) subjects' complaint of toothache or tenderness to percussion.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Pain pressure thresholds (PPTs) | Change from baseline and immediately post-intervention | PPT is defined as the minimal amount of pressure where a sense of pressure first changes to pain. The mechanical pressure algometer (Force Ten TM FDX Digital Force Gage) used in this study consisted of a round rubber disk (area, 1 cm2) attached to a pressure (force) gauge. The gauge displays values in kilograms but, because the surface of the rubber tip is 1 cm2, the readings are expressed in kg/cm2. The range of values of the pressure algometer is 0 to 10 kg, with 0.1-kg divisions. The pressure was applied at a rate of 0.31 kg/second (Chesterton et al. 2007). Chesterton et al. (2007) have shown that the reliability of pressure algometry is as high as \[ICC=0.91 (95% confidence interval, CI 0.82-0.97)\]. |
| Lingual muscle endurance | Change from baseline and immediately post-intervention | Lingual muscle endurance was assessed using the Iowa Oral Performance Instrument (IOPI) (Adams et al. 2015). The measurement of muscular endurance was carried out by placing a plastic bulb with oblong air content on the hard palate, posterior to the central incisor teeth. The participants were asked to elevate the lingual (through anterior and posterior lingual region) to press the instrument with the maximum possible force for 3 seconds, while monitoring the force exerted, quantified in Newtons. Adams et al. (2015) found moderate to strong reliability for anterior (ICC: 0.58-0.77) and posterior (ICC 0.77-0.84) tongue strength. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Maximal mouth opening (MMO) | Change from baseline and immediately post-intervention | The craniomandibular scale was used to assess the MMO. It was held with the right hand and the left hand was placed on the forehead to maintain the participant's neutral position. The following verbal command was given: open your mouth as wide as you can without moving your head. The assessor placed the scale on the incisal edge of the maxillary central incisor that was most vertically oriented, measured vertically to the labioincisal edge of the opposing mandibular incisor, and recorded this as the MMO measurement. Beltran-Alacreu et al. (2014) showed that reliability for MMO was good (inter-rater, ICC= 0.95-0.96; intra-rater, ICC= 0.95-0.96). Zawawi et al. (2003) found that the normal range of mouth opening in women is 40-57 mm and 42-68 mm in men |
| Lingual extensibility | Change from baseline and immediately post-intervention | This variable consists of measuring the tongue in centimeters, from the chin to the lingual vertex. Through the use of a lingual depressor, located in the midface sagittal axis at the height of the chin, the subject was asked for a maximum lingual protrusion, extending his tongue as far as possible, indicating that route on the lingual depressor and then measuring that distance. The mean obtained from two measurements was recorded. |
| Ability to generate mental motor images | Change from baseline and immediately post-intervention | Movement imagery questionnaire-revised (MIQ-R) is an 8-item self-report inventory and was used to assess visual and kinesthetic motor imagery ability. Four different movements are included in MIQ-R and it is comprised of four visual and four kinesthetic items. For each item, participants read a description of the movement. They then physically perform the movement and were instructed to re-assume the starting position after finishing the movement and before performing the mental task, imaging the movement visually or kinesthetically. Then, each participant rated the ease or difficulty of generating that image on a 7-point scale in which 7 indicates very easy to see/feel and 1 very difficult to see/feel. The internal consistencies of the MIQ-R have been consistently adequate with Cronbach's α coefficients ranging above 0.84 for the total scale, 0.80 for de visual subscale and 0.84 for the kinesthetic subscale (Campos and González 2010). |
Countries
Spain
Contacts
Primary ContactRoy La Touche
Backup ContactLuis Suso Martí
Outcome results
None listed