The main objective of this study is to examine the effect of different kinds of augmented feedback on learning an arm motor task.
ID
Source
Brief title
Condition
- Central nervous system vascular disorders
Synonym
Research involving
Sponsors and support
Intervention
Outcome measures
Primary outcome
The goal of this study is to assess the difference in amount of learning
between different kinds of augmented feedback. The main outcome measure is the
performance error, which is the difference in the performed movement with the
predefined movement.
Secondary outcome
nvt
Background summary
After a stroke, many patients suffer from an impaired motor task performance.
Optimal restoration of arm and hand function is essential for stroke survivors
to independently perform activities of daily life. To stimulate restoration of
arm function, rehabilitation must consist of intensive, active and functional
movement exercises. Addition of augmented feedback to exercises can stimulate
the learning process by making patients more aware of their performance. There
are different possibilities of providing the desired augmented feedback, such
as a score on a screen or knowledge about the way the arm moved, during
movement execution or when the movement is performed. Research about the effect
of these different kinds of augmented feedback in stroke survivors is scarce.
Study objective
The main objective of this study is to examine the effect of different kinds of
augmented feedback on learning an arm motor task.
Study design
In the study three conditions of different kinds of augmented feedback are
tested. The order of the feedback conditions differs per subject due to the use
of block randomisation. The study has a cross-sectional character, because the
subjects are tested at three independent moments. The experiment is completed
within three sessions. In each session subjects will learn arm movements by
means of a visual rotation on the screen, which represents their arm movement.
Three conditions of different kinds of augmented feedback are tested: 1)
feedback about the movement trajectory while performing the movement, 2)
feedback about the movement trajectory after the movement is performed, 3)
feedback about the achievement of the goal of the movement after the movement
is performed. In one measurement sessions one condition is tested. Time between
the different measurement sessions is one week.
Intervention
nvt
Study burden and risks
The risks for the subjects are limited to a minimum, since the movement tasks
are not beyond the capabilities of the subject. In addition the measurements in
this study (kinematics) are all non-invasive and involve no risks to the
subjects in any way. Participation of the subject in this experiment has no
direct benefit for him/her, other than expanding knowledge about the effect
augmented feedback on motor learning. This may eventually lead to the
development of new applications or adaptations to existing treatments in the
rehabilitation of arm function after stroke.
Roessinghsbleekweg 33b
7522 AH Enschede
NL
Roessinghsbleekweg 33b
7522 AH Enschede
NL
Listed location countries
Age
Inclusion criteria
Both healthy subjects and stroke survivors need to be able to understand and follow instructions, and be in the age of 18-75 years. For stroke survivors the time post stroke should be more than six months, there is no maximum to time post stroke.
Exclusion criteria
- Shoulder pain, either in rest or in movement.
- Neurologic, orthopaedic or rheumatologic disease of upper extremity, which is likely to interfere with mobility and/or strength of the arm.
Design
Recruitment
Followed up by the following (possibly more current) registration
No registrations found.
Other (possibly less up-to-date) registrations in this register
In other registers
| Register | ID |
|---|---|
| CCMO | NL31361.044.10 |
| OMON | NL-OMON25305 |