Journal Home
Search for

Volume 90, Issue 4, Pages 553-559 (April 2009)


View previous. 7 of 32 View next.

Effects of Motor Imagery on Hand Function During Immobilization After Flexor Tendon Repair

Martin W. Stenekes, MDabeCorresponding Author Informationemail address, Jan H. Geertzen, MD, PhDbc, Jean-Philippe A. Nicolai, MD, PhDa, Bauke M. De Jong, MD, PhDd, Theo Mulder, PhDef

Abstract 

Stenekes MW, Geertzen JH, Nicolai J-P, De Jong BM, Mulder T. Effects of motor imagery on hand function during immobilization after flexor tendon repair.

Objective

To determine whether motor imagery during the immobilization period after flexor tendon injury results in a faster recovery of central mechanisms of hand function.

Design

Randomized controlled trial.

Setting

Tertiary referral hospital.

Participants

Patients (N=28) after surgical flexor tendon repair were assigned to either an intervention group or a control group.

Intervention

Kinesthetic motor imagery of finger flexion movements during the postoperative dynamic splinting period.

Main Outcome Measures

The central aspects of hand function were measured with a preparation time test of finger flexion in which subjects pressed buttons as fast as possible following a visual stimulus. Additionally, the following hand function modalities were recorded: Michigan Hand Questionnaire, visual analog scale for hand function, kinematic analysis of drawing, active total motion, and strength.

Results

After the immobilization period, the motor imagery group demonstrated significantly less increase of preparation time than the control group (P=.024). There was no significant influence of motor imagery on the other tested hand function (P>.05). All tests except kinematic analysis (P=.570) showed a significant improvement across time after the splinting period (P≤.001).

Conclusions

Motor imagery significantly improves central aspects of hand function, namely movement preparation time, while other modalities of hand function appear to be unaffected.

a Department of Plastic Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

b Center for Rehabilitation, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

c Graduate School for Health Research, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

d Department of Neurology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

e Center for Human Movement Sciences, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

f Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests to Martin W. Stenekes, MD, Dept of Plastic Surgery, PO Box 30.001, 9700 RB Groningen, The Netherlands

 No commercial party having a direct financial interest in the results of the research supporting this article has or will confer a benefit on the authors or on any organization with which the authors are associated.

PII: S0003-9993(09)00079-3

doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2008.10.029


View previous. 7 of 32 View next.