Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.21256/zhaw-25903
Publication type: Article in scientific journal
Type of review: Peer review (publication)
Title: A different point of view : the evaluation of motor imagery perspectives in patients with sensorimotor impairments in a longitudinal study
Authors: Gäumann, Szabina
Gerber, Rahel Sarah
Suica, Zorica
Wandel, Jasmin
Schuster-Amft, Corina
et. al: No
DOI: 10.1186/s12883-021-02266-w
10.21256/zhaw-25903
Published in: BMC Neurology
Volume(Issue): 21
Issue: 297
Issue Date: 2021
Publisher / Ed. Institution: BioMed Central
ISSN: 1471-2377
Language: English
Subjects: Motor imagery; Motor imagery perspective; Neurorehabilitation; Sensorimotor impairment
Subject (DDC): 616.8: Neurology, diseases of nervous system
Abstract: Background: Motor imagery (MI) has been successfully applied in neurological rehabilitation. Little is known about the spontaneous selection of the MI perspectives in patients with sensorimotor impairments. What perspective is selected: internal (first-person view), or external (third-person view)? The aim was to evaluate the MI perspective preference in patients with sensorimotor impairments. Methods: In a longitudinal study including four measurement sessions, 55 patients (25 stroke, 25 multiple sclerosis, 5 Parkinson’s disease; 25 females; mean age 58 ± 14 years) were included. MI ability and perspective preference in both visual and kinaesthetic imagery modalities were assessed using the Kinaesthetic and Visual Imagery Questionnaire-20 (KVIQ-20), the body rotation task (BRT), and mental chronometry (MC). Additionally, patients’ activity level was assessed. Descriptive analyses were performed regarding different age- (< 45, 45–64, > 64), activity levels (inactive, partially active, active), and KVIQ-20 movement classifications (axial, proximal, distal, upper and lower limb). A mixed-effects model was used to investiage the relationship between the primary outcome (MI perspective: internal, external) with the explanatory variables age, MI modality (visual, kinaesthetic), movement type (axial, proximal, distal), activity levels and the different assessments (KVIQ-20, BRT, MC). Results: Imagery modality was not a significant predictor of perspective preference. Over the four measurement sessions, patients tended to become more consistent in their perspective selection, however, time point was not a significant predictor. Movement type was a significant predictor: imagination of distal vs. axial and proximal vs. axial movements were both associated with preference for external perspective. Patients with increased physical activity level tend to use internal imagery, however, this effect was borderline not statistically significant. Age was neither a significant precictor. Regarding the MI assessments, the KVIQ- 20 score was a significant predictor. The patients with higher test scores tend to use the external perspective. Conclusion: It is recommended to evaluate the spontaneous MI perspective selection to design patient-specific MI training interventions. Distal movements (foot, finger) may be an indicator when evaluating the consistency of the MI perspective in patients with sensorimotor impairments.
URI: https://digitalcollection.zhaw.ch/handle/11475/25903
Fulltext version: Published version
License (according to publishing contract): CC BY 4.0: Attribution 4.0 International
Departement: School of Health Sciences
Organisational Unit: Institute of Physiotherapy (IPT)
Appears in collections:Publikationen Gesundheit



Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.