Cargando…
Contextual interference in children with brain lesions: a pilot study investigating blocked vs. random practice order of an upper limb robotic exergame
INTRODUCTION: Evidence about contextual interference in children with brain lesions when practising motor tasks is lacking. Our main objective was to evaluate the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing blocked with random practice order of an upper limb robotic exergame to impr...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8228977/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34172085 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40814-021-00866-4 |
_version_ | 1783712868755046400 |
---|---|
author | Graser, Judith V. Bastiaenen, Caroline H. G. Gut, Anja Keller, Urs van Hedel, Hubertus J. A. |
author_facet | Graser, Judith V. Bastiaenen, Caroline H. G. Gut, Anja Keller, Urs van Hedel, Hubertus J. A. |
author_sort | Graser, Judith V. |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Evidence about contextual interference in children with brain lesions when practising motor tasks is lacking. Our main objective was to evaluate the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing blocked with random practice order of an upper limb robotic exergame to improve reaching in children with neuromotor disorders with a pilot trial. METHODS: We recruited children with brain lesions and impaired upper limb functions who underwent a 3-week schedule that consisted of baseline assessments, intervention period (participants were randomised to a blocked or random order group), and follow-up assessment. We evaluated ten feasibility criteria, including the practicability of the inclusion/exclusion criteria, recruitment rate, feasibility of randomisation, scheduling procedure, and the participants’ programme adherence. RESULTS: The inclusion/exclusion criteria were not completely feasible as patients who were not able to perform the exergames were included. Twelve participants were recruited, and six datasets were used for analysis. The scheduling and randomisation procedures were generally feasible, but the procedure was only partially feasible for the participants, as some sessions were aborted due to lack of motivation and fatigue. CONCLUSION: An RCT following this study protocol is not feasible. We formulated suggestions for future studies that aim to investigate contextual interference as in this pilot study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02443857, registered on May 14, 2015 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40814-021-00866-4. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8228977 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82289772021-06-28 Contextual interference in children with brain lesions: a pilot study investigating blocked vs. random practice order of an upper limb robotic exergame Graser, Judith V. Bastiaenen, Caroline H. G. Gut, Anja Keller, Urs van Hedel, Hubertus J. A. Pilot Feasibility Stud Research INTRODUCTION: Evidence about contextual interference in children with brain lesions when practising motor tasks is lacking. Our main objective was to evaluate the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing blocked with random practice order of an upper limb robotic exergame to improve reaching in children with neuromotor disorders with a pilot trial. METHODS: We recruited children with brain lesions and impaired upper limb functions who underwent a 3-week schedule that consisted of baseline assessments, intervention period (participants were randomised to a blocked or random order group), and follow-up assessment. We evaluated ten feasibility criteria, including the practicability of the inclusion/exclusion criteria, recruitment rate, feasibility of randomisation, scheduling procedure, and the participants’ programme adherence. RESULTS: The inclusion/exclusion criteria were not completely feasible as patients who were not able to perform the exergames were included. Twelve participants were recruited, and six datasets were used for analysis. The scheduling and randomisation procedures were generally feasible, but the procedure was only partially feasible for the participants, as some sessions were aborted due to lack of motivation and fatigue. CONCLUSION: An RCT following this study protocol is not feasible. We formulated suggestions for future studies that aim to investigate contextual interference as in this pilot study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02443857, registered on May 14, 2015 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40814-021-00866-4. BioMed Central 2021-06-25 /pmc/articles/PMC8228977/ /pubmed/34172085 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40814-021-00866-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Graser, Judith V. Bastiaenen, Caroline H. G. Gut, Anja Keller, Urs van Hedel, Hubertus J. A. Contextual interference in children with brain lesions: a pilot study investigating blocked vs. random practice order of an upper limb robotic exergame |
title | Contextual interference in children with brain lesions: a pilot study investigating blocked vs. random practice order of an upper limb robotic exergame |
title_full | Contextual interference in children with brain lesions: a pilot study investigating blocked vs. random practice order of an upper limb robotic exergame |
title_fullStr | Contextual interference in children with brain lesions: a pilot study investigating blocked vs. random practice order of an upper limb robotic exergame |
title_full_unstemmed | Contextual interference in children with brain lesions: a pilot study investigating blocked vs. random practice order of an upper limb robotic exergame |
title_short | Contextual interference in children with brain lesions: a pilot study investigating blocked vs. random practice order of an upper limb robotic exergame |
title_sort | contextual interference in children with brain lesions: a pilot study investigating blocked vs. random practice order of an upper limb robotic exergame |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8228977/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34172085 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40814-021-00866-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT graserjudithv contextualinterferenceinchildrenwithbrainlesionsapilotstudyinvestigatingblockedvsrandompracticeorderofanupperlimbroboticexergame AT bastiaenencarolinehg contextualinterferenceinchildrenwithbrainlesionsapilotstudyinvestigatingblockedvsrandompracticeorderofanupperlimbroboticexergame AT gutanja contextualinterferenceinchildrenwithbrainlesionsapilotstudyinvestigatingblockedvsrandompracticeorderofanupperlimbroboticexergame AT kellerurs contextualinterferenceinchildrenwithbrainlesionsapilotstudyinvestigatingblockedvsrandompracticeorderofanupperlimbroboticexergame AT vanhedelhubertusja contextualinterferenceinchildrenwithbrainlesionsapilotstudyinvestigatingblockedvsrandompracticeorderofanupperlimbroboticexergame |