Skip to content

Does Motor Imagery Training Enhance Control of Movement in Older Adults?

Motor Imagery Training, Force Steadiness and Neural Drive

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT05669131
Enrollment
60
Registered
2022-12-30
Start date
2022-12-31
Completion date
2023-08-31
Last updated
2022-12-30

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

Conditions

Healthy

Keywords

Aged, Aged, 80 and over

Brief summary

The goal of this clinical trial is learn about motor imagery training (i.e. imagining a task) with healthy older adults. The main question this clinical trial aims to answer is: • Will imagining a task improve control of force during an elbow flexion muscle contraction in healthy older adults? Participants will: * Complete questionaries about general activity levels and ability to imagine tasks * Perform either motor imagery training or watch a documentary * Perform maximal and submaximal elbow flexion contractions Researchers will compare the motor imagery training with the control group to see if control of force is improved in the motor imagery training group.

Detailed description

Motor imagery training could be beneficial in rehabilitative settings when participants are not physically capable of preforming a motor task or in injury prevention scenarios such as when multiple repetitions of a motor task should not be performed. If the effects of motor imagery training are favourable then they could have meaningful influence on the performance of steady movements in older adults who experience declines in force steadiness with age. Therefore, the first aim of this study will be to determine if one session of motor imagery training will influence corticospinal excitability in older adults and improve force steadiness during isometric elbow flexion contractions with the observed benefit being greater in females. The second aim of this study will be to determine if there is an associated change in oscillations in common synaptic input to motor neurons with a change in force steadiness.

Interventions

Participants imagine themselves through their own eyes performing submaximal elbow flexion contractions.

Sponsors

University of British Columbia
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
BASIC_SCIENCE
Masking
NONE

Intervention model description

Participants will be randomly assigned to either the motor imagery training group or the control group.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
65 Years to 90 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

Healthy older adults aged 65 to 90 years old

Exclusion criteria

1. have had an injury or orthopaedic surgery to the arm or shoulder in the prior 6 months 2. are involved in high levels of upper-body strength training 3. have history of training in fine motor tasks (i.e., musicians) 4. have a history of MIT 5. have systemic diseases and/or nerve damage affecting neuromuscular function 6. have severe cognitive impairment 7. are unable to read or speak English fluently 8. are left hand dominant

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Force steadinessWithin one session: Change from baseline (immediately before session) to 20 minutes after the sessionMeasured as the the coefficient in variation of force
Corticospinal excitabilityWithin one session: Change from baseline (immediately before session) to 20 minutes after the sessionMeasured as the peak-to-peak amplitude of a motor evoked potential
Common synaptic inputWithin one session: Change from baseline (immediately before session) to 20 minutes after the sessionEstimated from motor unit discharge times.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Maximal elbow flexion forceWithin one session: Change from baseline (immediately before session) to 20 minutes after the sessionThe total amount of force produced during a maximal contraction

Contacts

Primary ContactJennifer Jakobi, PhD
jennifer.jakobi@ubc.ca250-807-9884

Outcome results

None listed

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