Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Volume 88, Issue 7 , Pages 901-906 , July 2007

Biodynamic Feedback Training to Assure Learning Partial Load Bearing on Forearm Crutches

  • Daniel Krause, MSc

      Affiliations

    • Department of Sport and Health, Sports Sciences, Faculty of Science, University Paderborn, Paderborn, Germany
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests to Daniel Krause, MSc, Universität Paderborn, Warburgerstraße 100, 33098 Paderborn, Germany
    • ,
  • Martin Wünnemann, MSc

      Affiliations

    • Department of Sport and Health, Sports Sciences, Faculty of Science, University Paderborn, Paderborn, Germany
    • ,
  • Andre Erlmann, MSc

      Affiliations

    • Department of Sport and Health, Sports Sciences, Faculty of Science, University Paderborn, Paderborn, Germany
    • ,
  • Timo Hölzchen, MSc

      Affiliations

    • Department of Sport and Health, Sports Sciences, Faculty of Science, University Paderborn, Paderborn, Germany
    • ,
  • Melanie Mull, MSc

      Affiliations

    • Department of Sport and Health, Sports Sciences, Faculty of Science, University Paderborn, Paderborn, Germany
    • ,
  • Norbert Olivier, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Sport and Health, Sports Sciences, Faculty of Science, University Paderborn, Paderborn, Germany
    • ,
  • Thomas Jöllenbeck, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Biomechanics Laboratory, Klinik Lindenplatz, Bad Sassendorf, Germany.

References 

  1. Wirtz D, Niethard F. Ursachen, Diagnostik und Therapie der aseptischen Hüftendoprothesenlockerung—eine Standortbestimmung. Z Orthop. 1997;135:270–280
  2. Jöllenbeck T, Schönle C. Die Teilbelastung nach Knie- oder Hüft-Totalendoprothese—die Unmöglichkeit der Einhaltung, ihre Ursachen und Abhilfen. Z Orthop. 2005;143:124–128
  3. Vasarhelyi A, Baumert T, Fritsch C, Hopfenmuller W, Gradl G, Mittlmeier T. Partial weight bearing after surgery for fractures of the lower extremity—is it achievable?. Gait Posture. 2006;23:99–105
  4. Warren CG, Lehmann JF. Training procedures and biofeedback methods to achieve controlled partial weight bearing: an assessment. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1975;56:449–455
  5. Daugs R, Blischke K, Olivier N, Marschall F. Beiträge zum visuomotorischen Lernen im Sport. Schorndorf: Hofmann; 1989;
  6. Schmidt RA, Wrisberg CA. Motor learning and performance: a problem-based learning approach. 3rd ed. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 2004;
  7. Salmoni A, Schmidt R, Walter C. Knowledge of results and motor learning: a review and critical reappraisal. Psychol Bull. 1984;95:355–386
  8. Magill RA, Hall KG. A review of the contextual interference effect in motor skill acquisition. Hum Mov Sci. 1990;9:214–289
  9. Brady F. A theoretical and empirical review of the contextual interference effect and the learning of motor skills. Quest. 1998;50:266–293
  10. Brady F. Contextual interference: a meta-analytic study. Percept Mot Skills. 2004;99:116–126
  11. Magill RA. Motor learning: concepts and applications. 7th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2004;
  12. Schmidt RA, Lee TD. Motor control and learning: a behavioral emphasis. 3rd ed. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 1999;
  13. Winstein C, Schmidt RA. Reduced frequency of knowledge of results enhances motor skill learning. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1990;16:677–691
  14. Battig WF. Facilitation and interference. In:  Bilodeau EA editors. Acquisition of skill. New York: Academic Pr; 1966;p. 215–244
  15. Shea JB, Morgan RL. Contextual interference effects on the acquisition, retention and transfer of a motor skill. J Exp Psychol. 1979;5:179–187
  16. Lee TD, Magill RA. The locus of contextual interference in motor-skill acquisition. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1983;9:730–746
  17. Shea JB, Zimny ST. Context effects in memory and learning movement information. In:  Magill RA editors. Memory and control of action. Amsterdam: North-Holland; 1983;p. 345–366
  18. Wulf G, Schmidt RA. Contextual interference effects in motor learning: evaluating a KR-usefulness hypothesis. In:  Nitsch JR,  Seiler R editor. Bewegung und Sport. Psychologische Grundlagen und Wirkungen. Vol 2: Bewegungsregulation und motorisches Lernen. St. Augustin: Academia; 1994;p. 304–309
  19. Proteau L, Blandin Y, Alain C, Dorion A. The effects of the amount and variability of practice on the learning of multi-segmented motor task. Acta Psychol. 1994;85:61–74
  20. Landin D, Hebert EP. A comparison of three practice schedules along the contextual interference continuum. Res Q Exerc Sport. 1997;68:357–361
  21. Youdas JW, Kotajarvi PT, Padgett DJ, Kaufmann KR. Partial weight-bearing gait using conventional assistive devices. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86:394–398
  22. Guadagnoli MA, Lee TD. Challenge point: a framework for conceptualizing the effects of various practice conditions in motor learning. J Mot Behav. 2004;36:212–224
  23. Wood CA, Ging CA. The role of interference and task similarity on the acquisition, retention, and transfer of simple motor skills. Res Q Exerc Sport. 1991;62:18–26
  24. Cole JC, Rotella DL, Harper JG. Tactile impairments cannot explain the effect of age on a grasp and lift task. Exp Brain Res. 1998;121:263–269
  25. Thornburry JM, Mistretta CM. Tactile sensitivity as a function of age. J Gerontol. 1981;36:34–39

 No commercial party having a direct financial interest in the results of the research supporting this article has or will confer a benefit upon the author(s) or upon any organization with which the author(s) is/are associated.

PII: S0003-9993(07)00231-6

doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2007.03.022

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Volume 88, Issue 7 , Pages 901-906 , July 2007

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution