4.5 Article

Effects of mirror neuron system-based training on rehabilitation of stroke patients

Journal

BRAIN AND BEHAVIOR
Volume 10, Issue 8, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/brb3.1729

Keywords

cognitive function; mirror neuron system; stroke; training; upper extremity function

Funding

  1. Commission of Health and Family Planning in Changning District [20164Y002]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective To investigate the clinical effects of the mirror neuron system (MNS)-based training on upper extremity motor function and cognitive function in stroke patients. Methods Sixty stroke patients (time from stroke onset 3-9 months) with upper extremity paresis (Brunnstrom stage II-IV) and cognitive impairment (MoCA score >= 15) were enrolled in this study. Patients were randomly allocated into MNS treatment group (N = 30) and control group (N = 30). Both groups underwent regular training for upper extremity motor function and cognitive function, and the MNS group was trained with a therapeutic apparatus named mirror neuron system training (MNST) including different levels of action observation training (AOT). Training lasted 20 min/day, 5 days/week for 8 weeks. MoCA, reaction time, and Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST) were assessed at baseline and 8 weeks after training. Furthermore, Fugl-Meyer assessment (FMA) and Modified Barthel index (MBI) were adopted to evaluated upper extremity motor function and daily life ability. Results After 8 consecutive weeks' training, both groups showed significant improvements on the upper extremity motor function, cognitive function, and daily life ability score after training (p < .05). The MNS group showed significantly improved upper extremity motor function and cognitive function (p < .05) compared with control group. Conclusions Combining MNS-based and conventional training can improve upper extremity motor function and cognitive function in stroke patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available