SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Motor imagery and action-observation in neurorehabilitation: A study protocol in Parkinson's disease patients.

Front Neurol · 2022-10-04

DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2022.990618PMID: 36267882

Open accessmethods-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

IntroductionAction Observation Treatment (AOT) and Motor Imagery (MI) represent very promising cognitive strategies in neuro-rehabilitation. This study aims to compare the effectiveness of the two cognitive strategies, taken alone or combined, in Parkinson's disease patients.Material and methodsThis study is designed as a prospective randomized controlled trial, with four arms. We estimated a sample size of 64 patients (16 in each treatment group) to be able to detect an effect size of F = 0.4 with a statistical significance of 0.05. Primary outcomes will be functional gains in the FIM and UPDRS scales. Secondary outcome measure will be functional gain as revealed by kinematic parameters measured at Gait Analysis.DiscussionThe results of this trial will provide insights into the use of AOT and MI, taken alone or combined, in the rehabilitation of Parkinson's disease patients.Ethics and disseminationThe study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Don Gnocchi Foundation. The study will be conducted in accordance with the 1996 World Medical Association guidelines and according to good clinical practice. The study has been registered on clinicaltrial.gov under the following code: AOTPRFDG. Dissemination will include both submission of the study to peer-reviewed journals and discussion of the study protocol at conferences.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.