How physical therapists instruct patients with stroke: an observational study on attentional focus during gait rehabilitation after stroke

Optimal Training for Movement Acquisition and Transfer: Does "Externally Focused" Visual Biofeedback Promote Implicit Motor Learning?

CONTEXT

Visual biofeedback has been shown to facilitate injury-resistant movement acquisition in adolescent athletes. Visual biofeedback is typically thought to foster implicit learning by stimulating athletes to focus attention externally (on movement outcome). However, biofeedback may also induce explicit learning if the athlete uses the visual information to consciously guide movement execution (via an internal focus).

OBJECTIVE

To determine the degree to which athletes reported statements indicating implicit or explicit motor learning after engaging in a visual biofeedback intervention.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Three-dimensional motion-analysis laboratory.

PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-five adolescent female soccer athletes (age = 15.0 ± 1.5 years, height = 165.7 ± 5.9 cm, mass = 59.4 ± 10.6 kg).

INTERVENTIONS

Standard 6-week neuromuscular training intervention (three 90-minute sessions/wk), with added visual biofeedback sessions (2 sessions/wk). For the biofeedback training, participants performed squatting and jumping movements while interacting with a visual rectangular stimulus that mapped key parameters associated with injury risk. After the last biofeedback session in each week, participants answered open-ended questions to probe learning strategies.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Responses to the open-ended questions were categorized as externally focused (ie, on movement outcome, suggestive of implicit learning), internally focused (ie, on movement itself, suggestive of explicit learning), mixed focus, or other.

RESULTS

A total of 171 open-ended responses were collected. Most of the responses that could be categorized (39.2%) were externally focused (41.8%), followed by mixed (38.8%) and internally focused (19.4%). The frequency of externally focused statements increased from week 1 (18%) to week 6 (50%).

CONCLUSIONS

Although most statements were externally focused (suggesting implicit learning), the relatively large proportion of internal- and mixed-focus statements suggested that many athletes also engaged in explicit motor learning, especially in early practice sessions. Therefore, biofeedback may affect motor learning through a mixture of implicit and explicit learning.

The order of attentional focus instructions affects how postural control processes compensate for multisensory mismatch: a crossover study

Directing attention during balance training can have an immediate and lasting impact on a patient's balance and ultimately decrease the risk of future falls. However, it is unclear how attention can best be utilized to improve postural control. The current study uses a 2 × 2 crossover design to investigate the potential impact of receiving multiple verbal instructions during a single session of sensorimotor control testing for balance. Twenty-eight healthy adults were tasked to balance on a rocker board while immersed in virtual reality (VR). The VR created a multisensory mismatch between visual VR motion and body motion. The strength of the relationship between visual motion and body motion was measured to assess visual dependence. Alpha and theta frequency bands in electroencephalography (EEG) recordings were also analyzed to identify potential neural correlates of visual dependence and postural stability. Participants were randomized into two groups: one group was first instructed to keep the board leveled (external focus) and then instructed to keep both feet leveled (internal focus) to help maintain stability. The other group was given these two instructions in reverse order. Analyses focused on time, instruction, and group effects from receiving multiple instructions. Results revealed that when participants are given external focus first, and internal focus second, they are more likely to demonstrate lower visual dependence and better postural stability throughout the entire session than participants given internal focus first and external focus second. However, channel-level EEG analyses did not reveal differences between the groups. Current findings suggest that the order of attentional focus instructions may influence how the postural control system resolves sensory incongruence during a single testing session.

The Path to Translating Focus of Attention Research Into Canadian Physiotherapy, Part 1: Physiotherapists’ Self-Reported Focus of Attention Use Via a Study-Specific Questionnaire

The focus of attention literature has shown robust findings for the benefits of providing statements that focus on the movement effect or outcome (external focus of attention [EFOA]) as opposed to focusing on the movement kinematics (internal focus of attention). Observational studies, however, have revealed that physiotherapists use fewer EFOA statements than internal focus of attention statements in their practice. Most evidence in this regard has been from non-Canadian physiotherapists working in stroke rehabilitation; consequently, we sought to examine whether Canadian physiotherapists working with various rehabilitation populations also use EFOA statements to a lesser extent than internal focus of attention statements. The “Therapists’ Perceptions of Motor Learning Principles Questionnaire (TPMLPQ)” was thus designed and data from 121 Canadian physiotherapists showed low relative frequencies of EFOA use (31.3% ± 14%) averaged across six hypothetical scenarios. A higher EFOA was reported, however, for two of the six scenarios: a functional reaching scenario (55.5% ± 37.0%) and pelvic floor task (65.6% ±32.9%). This data suggest that the findings of EFOA benefits have not been widely translated into Canadian physiotherapy settings; furthermore, the findings of the scenario-dependency warrant future investigation into factors, such as task characteristics, that may influence physiotherapists’ FOA use.

Direction of attentional focus in prosthetic training: Current practice and potential for improving motor learning in individuals with lower limb loss

Objective

Adopting an external focus of attention has been shown to benefit motor performance and learning. However, the potential of optimizing attentional focus for improving prosthetic motor skills in lower limb prosthesis (LLP) users has not been examined. In this study, we investigated the frequency and direction of attentional focus embedded in the verbal instructions in a clinical prosthetic training setting.

Methods

Twenty-one adult LLP users (8 female, 13 male; 85% at K3 level; mean age = 50.5) were recruited from prosthetic clinics in the Southern Nevada region. Verbal interactions between LLP users and their prosthetists (mean experience = 10 years, range = 4–21 years) during prosthetic training were recorded. Recordings were analyzed to categorize the direction of attentional focus embedded in the instructional and feedback statements as internal, external, mixed, or unfocused. We also explored whether LLP users’ age, time since amputation, and perceived mobility were associated with the proportion of attentional focus statements they received.

Results

We recorded a total of 20 training sessions, yielding 904 statements of instruction from 338 minutes of training. Overall, one verbal interaction occurred every 22.1 seconds. Among the statements, 64% were internal, 9% external, 3% mixed, and 25% unfocused. Regression analysis revealed that female, older, and higher functioning LLP users were significantly more likely to receive internally-focused instructions (p = 0.006, 0.035, and 0.024, respectively).

Conclusions

Our results demonstrated that verbal instructions and feedback are frequently provided to LLP users during prosthetic training. Most verbal interactions are focused internally on the LLP users’ body movements and not externally on the movement effects.

Impact statement

While more research is needed to explore how motor learning principles may be applied to improve LLP user outcomes, clinicians should consider adopting the best available scientific evidence during treatment. Overreliance on internally-focused instructions as observed in the current study may hinder prosthetic skill learning.

Female Athletes Exhibit Greater Trial-to-Trial Coordination Variability When Provided with Instructions Promoting an External Focus

The purpose of this study was to examine how instructions promoting different attentional foci influence joint coordination patterns and trial-to-trial coordination variability during landing. Sixteen females performed drop landings with their typical technique (baseline) and after receiving instructions promoting an internal focus and an external focus. The coordination patterns, and trial-to-trial coordination variability, of the sagittal plane hip-knee, hip-ankle, and knee-ankle angle pairings were compared across conditions. While there was no difference in the joint coordination patterns among the conditions, subjects exhibited greater hip-ankle and knee-ankle trial-to-trial coordination variability for the external focus condition, vs. the baseline and internal focus conditions, which may help to explain the improved motor learning outcomes for athletes who train with an external focus.

Implicit and Explicit Motor Learning Interventions Have Similar Effects on Walking Speed in People After Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

Clinicians may use implicit or explicit motor learning approaches to facilitate motor learning of patients with stroke. Implicit motor learning approaches have shown promising results in healthy populations. The purpose of this study was to assess whether an implicit motor learning walking intervention is more effective compared with an explicit motor learning walking intervention delivered at home regarding walking speed in people after stroke in the chronic phase of recovery.

METHODS

This randomized, controlled, single-blind trial was conducted in the home environment. The 79 participants, who were in the chronic phase after stroke (age = 66.4 [SD = 11.0] years; time poststroke = 70.1 [SD = 64.3] months; walking speed = 0.7 [SD = 0.3] m/s; Berg Balance Scale score = 44.5 [SD = 9.5]), were randomly assigned to an implicit (n = 38) or explicit (n = 41) group. Analogy learning was used as the implicit motor learning walking intervention, whereas the explicit motor learning walking intervention consisted of detailed verbal instructions. Both groups received 9 training sessions (30 minutes each), for a period of 3 weeks, targeted at improving quality of walking. The primary outcome was walking speed measured by the 10-Meter Walk Test at a comfortable walking pace. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, immediately after intervention, and 1 month postintervention.

RESULTS

No statistically or clinically relevant differences between groups were obtained postintervention (between-group difference was estimated at 0.02 m/s [95% CI = -0.04 to 0.08] and at follow-up (between-group difference estimated at -0.02 m/s [95% CI = -0.09 to 0.05]).

CONCLUSION

Implicit motor learning was not superior to explicit motor learning to improve walking speed in people after stroke in the chronic phase of recovery.

IMPACT

To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine the effects of implicit compared with explicit motor learning on a functional task in people after stroke. Results indicate that physical therapists can use (tailored) implicit and explicit motor learning strategies to improve walking speed in people after stroke who are in the chronic phase of recovery.

Verbal feedback enhances motor learning during post-stroke gait retraining

BACKGROUND

Fast treadmill walking combined with functional electrical stimulation to ankle muscles (FastFES) is a well-studied gait intervention that improves post-stroke walking function. Although individualized verbal feedback is commonly incorporated during clinical gait training, and a variable practice structure is posited to enhance learning, the influence of these two factors on motor learning during locomotor interventions such as FastFES is poorly understood.

OBJECTIVES

To determine if the addition of individualized verbal feedback or variable practice to a FastFES training session enhances motor learning of targeted gait patterns.

METHODS

Nine individuals with post-stroke hemiparesis completed a crossover study comprising exposure to 3 dose-matched types of gait training: (1) FastFES (FF), comprising five 6-minute bouts of training with intermittent FES, (2) FF with addition of individualized verbal instructions and faded feedback delivered by a physical therapist (FF+PT), (3) FF with variable gait speed and FES timing (FF+Var). Gait biomechanics data were collected before (Pre), immediately after (Post), and 24-h following (Retention) each training type. Within-session and retention change scores of 3 targeted gait variables were calculated to assess locomotor learning.

RESULTS

FF+PT resulted in larger improvements within-session and at retention in trailing limb angle, and a trend for larger improvements in paretic pushoff compared to FF. FF+Var failed to show greater learning of biomechanical variables compared to FF.

CONCLUSIONS

Addition of individualized verbal feedback (FF+PT) to a single session of gait training may enhance within- and across-session learning of targeted gait variables in people post-stroke, and merits more investigation.

[Modern aspects of the pathophysiology of walking disorders and their rehabilitation in post-stroke patients]

The problem of rehabilitation of post-stroke patients with motor deficit remains relevant with growing prevalence of disability and decreasing mortality, despite all measures aimed at stroke prevention and morbidity reduction. One of the most common consequences of stroke is gait impairment as a result of spastic paresis of the lower limb (decreased gait velocity, shortened step, excessive loading of intact limb etc.), which leads to significant maladaptation, increased risk of falls, decrease in quality of life. The article presents a detailed review of motor action in normal and pathologic conditions, analysis of neuronal structures involved into a movement act in healthy individuals and in stroke patients, current aspects of gait pathophysiology, characteristics of post-stroke gait (speed and asymmetry of gain, balance control impairment). A separate paragraph is devoted to gait recovery after stroke with analysis of existing and developing strategies of rehabilitation, aimed at the improvement of vertical posture, balance control and movement, condition, tone and functioning of skeletal muscles. Authors also analyze new research information on the efficacy of botulinum toxin preparations and programs of Guided Self-Rehabilitation Contracts (GSC), present the results of clinical trials demonstrating the efficacy of combination of these two methods.

Individualized feedback to change multiple gait deficits in chronic stroke

Background

Walking deficits in people post-stroke are often multiple and idiosyncratic in nature. Limited patient and therapist resources necessitate prioritization of deficits such that some may be left unaddressed. More efficient delivery of therapy may alleviate this challenge. Here, we look to determine the utility of a novel principal component-based visual feedback system that targets multiple, patient-specific features of gait in people post-stroke.

Methods

Ten individuals with stroke received two sessions of visual feedback to attain a walking goal. This goal consisted of bilateral knee and hip joint angles of a typical ‘healthy’ walking pattern. The feedback system uses principal component analysis (PCA) to algorithmically weight each of the input features so that participants received one stream of performance feedback. In the first session, participants had to explore different patterns to achieve the goal, and in the second session they were informed of the goal walking pattern. Ten healthy, age-matched individuals received the same paradigm, but with a hemiparetic goal (i.e. to produce the pattern of an exemplar stroke participant). This was to distinguish the extent to which performance limitations in stroke were due neurological injury or the PCA based visual feedback itself.

Results

Principal component-based visual feedback can differentially bias multiple features of walking toward a prescribed goal. On average, individuals with stroke typically improved performance via increased paretic knee and hip flexion, and did not perform better with explicit instruction. In contrast, healthy people performed better (i.e. could produce the desired exemplar stroke pattern) in both sessions, and were best with explicit instruction. Importantly, the feedback for stroke participants accommodated a heterogeneous set of walking deficits by individually weighting each feature based on baseline walking.

Conclusions

People with and without stroke are able to use this novel visual feedback to train multiple, specific features of gait. Important for stroke, the PCA feedback allowed for targeting of patient-specific deficits. This feedback is flexible to any feature of walking in any plane of movement, thus providing a potential tool for therapists to simultaneously target multiple aberrant features of gait.

Efficient search under constraints and not working memory resources supports creative action emergence in a convergent motor task

Creative (original and functional) solutions to problems can be facilitated by guiding search behavior. According to cognitive models, when solving convergent tasks (tasks with few solutions), high available working memory (WM) resources and capacity can guide creative solution emergence via repeated (persistent) search within a solution subcategory. However, no clear associations have been found of WM capacity on creative outcomes when tasks require the individual to enact solutions in divergent doing tasks. This study further tested constraints on WM resources on search behavior and creative outcomes in a convergent doing task. Novices to combat sports were asked to repeatedly strike a target with the intent to achieve an individualized target force. In order to manipulate available WM resources, every ten strikes, participants were asked to recall and then retain a sequence of 5 digits (high load group: n = 21) or 2 digits (low load group: n = 21). The task constraints favored the functionality (or appropriateness) of a qualitatively distinct, non-obvious solution. Functionality was assessed using the force registered for each strike. Originality was assessed in terms of how infrequently actions occurred. Finally, search behavior was quantified based on changes in which limb was used and changes in which part of the limb was used from one strike to the next. There were no significant effects of WM load on creativity outcomes, solution search, or task success. Rather, task success was related to efficient search and creativity. Future research should focus on constraints (other than WM resources) that promote efficient search.

Are the effects of internal focus instructions different from external focus instructions given during balance training in stroke patients? A double-blind randomized controlled trial

Objective:

This study aimed to assess if external focus instructions result in greater improvements in motor skill and automaticity compared to internal focus instructions in stroke patients.

Design:

Double-blind randomized controlled trial.

Setting:

Inpatient stroke rehabilitation unit.

Subjects:

A total of 63 stroke patients (Meanage = 59.6 ± 10.7 years; Meandays since stroke = 28.5 ± 16.6; MedianFunctional Ambulation Categories = 4).

Interventions:

Patients were randomly assigned to an internal ( N = 31) or external ( N = 32) focus instruction group. Both groups practiced a balance board stabilization task, three times per week, for three weeks. Balance performance was assessed at baseline, and after one and three weeks of practice.

Main measures:

Primary outcome was the threshold stiffness (Nm/rad) at which patients could stay balanced. Secondary outcomes were patients’ sway (root-mean-square error in degrees) at the baseline threshold stiffness under single- and dual-task conditions, and their performance on the Timed Up and Go Test and Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation.

Results:

Both groups achieved similar improvements in threshold stiffness (∆= 27.1 ± 21.1 Nm/rad), and single- (∆= 1.8 ± 2.3° root-mean-square error) and dual-task sway (∆= 1.7 ± 2.1° root-mean-square error) after three weeks of practice. No differences were found in improvements in clinical tests of balance and mobility. Patients with comparatively good balance and sensory function, and low attention capacity showed greatest improvements with external focus instructions.

Conclusion:

External focus instructions did not result in greater improvement in balance skill in stroke patients compared to internal focus instructions. Results suggest that tailoring instructions to the individual stroke patient may result in optimal improvements in motor skill.

Effect of Attentional Focus Instructions on Motor Learning and Performance of Patients with Central Nervous System and Musculoskeletal Disorders: a Systematic Review

Exercise is one of the main rehabilitative interventions, commonly used to improve performance and motor learning. During the application of attentional focus strategies, External Focus of Attention (EFA) aiming at the movement effect has been reported to have more efficacy than Internal Focus of Attention (IFA) aiming at movement characteristics in healthy subjects. There are not many studies that compare the EFA and IFA instructions in people with Musculoskeletal (MSK) and Central Nervous System disorders (CNS). The purpose of this systematic review is to determine if IFA or EFA, in patients with CNS or MSK, may improve performance and have some effects on motor learning. Databases used for research: PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, PEDro, PsycINFO, SCOPUS. Inclusion criteria: Randomized Controlled Trial, quasi-Randomized Controlled Trial, enrolled subjects with CNS or with MSK and compared the efficacy of EFA and IFA. The studies suggest that the EFA is better than IFA in affecting the movement execution in patients with MSK, while conflicted findings emerge in presence of CNS disorders. Studies included in the qualitative analysis showed heterogeneous methodological features in study design and conductance, so results must be interpreted with caution.

The Effects of Implicit and Explicit Motor Learning in Gait Rehabilitation of People After Stroke: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

A significant part of neurological rehabilitation focuses on facilitating the learning of motor skills. Training can adopt either (more) explicit or (more) implicit forms of motor learning. Gait is one of the most practiced motor skills within rehabilitation in people after stroke because it is an important criterion for discharge and requirement for functioning at home.

Objective

The aim of this study was to describe the design of a randomized controlled study assessing the effects of implicit motor learning compared with the explicit motor learning in gait rehabilitation of people suffering from stroke.

Methods

The study adopts a randomized, controlled, single-blinded study design. People after stroke will be eligible for participation when they are in the chronic stage of recovery (>6 months after stroke), would like to improve walking performance, have a slow walking speed (<1 m/s), can communicate in Dutch, and complete a 3-stage command. People will be excluded if they cannot walk a minimum of 10 m or have other additional impairments that (severely) influence gait. Participants will receive 9 gait-training sessions over a 3-week period and will be randomly allocated to an implicit or explicit group. Therapists are aware of the intervention they provide, and the assessors are blind to the intervention participants receive. Outcome will be assessed at baseline (T0), directly after the intervention (T1), and after 1 month (T2). The primary outcome parameter is walking velocity. Walking performance will be assessed with the 10-meter walking test, Dynamic Gait Index, and while performing a secondary task (dual task). Self-reported measures are the Movement Specific Reinvestment Scale, verbal protocol, Stroke and Aphasia Quality of Life Scale, and the Global Perceived Effect scale. A process evaluation will take place to identify how the therapy was perceived and identify factors that may have influenced the effectiveness of the intervention. Repeated measures analyses will be conducted to determine significant and clinical relevant differences between groups and over time.

Results

Data collection is currently ongoing and results are expected in 2019.

Conclusions

The relevance of the study as well as the advantages and disadvantages of several aspects of the chosen design are discussed, for example, the personalized approach and choice of measurements.

Trial Registration

Netherlands Trial Register NTR6272; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=6272 (Archived by WebCite http://www.webcitation.org/6ytA937m5)

Registered Report Identifier

RR1-10.2196/9595