ABSTRACT
Objective: The objective of this review was to evaluate the efficacy of mental imagery training (MIT) in promoting bilateral transfer (BT) of motor performance for healthy subjects. Data sources: We searched 6 online-databases (Jul-Dec 2022) using terms: "mental practice," "motor imagery training," "motor imagery practice," "mental training," "movement imagery," "cognitive training," "bilateral transfer," "interlimb transfer," "cross education," "motor learning," "strength," "force" and "motor performance." Study selection and data extraction: We selected randomized-controlled studies that examined the effect of MIT on BT. Two reviewers independently determined if each study met the inclusion criteria for the review. Disagreements were resolved through discussion and, if necessary, by a third reviewer. A total of 9 articles out of 728 initially identified studies were chosen for the meta-analysis. Data synthesis: The meta-analysis included 14 studies for the comparison between MIT and no-exercise control (CTR) and 15 studies for the comparison between MIT and physical training (PT). Results: MIT showed significant benefit in inducing BT compared to CTR (ES = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.57-0.98). The effect of MIT on BT was similar to that of PT (ES = -0.02, 95% CI = -0.15-0.17). Subgroup analyses showed that internal MIT (IMIT) was more effective (ES = 2.17, 95% CI = 1.57-2.76) than external MIT (EMIT) (ES = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.74-1.17), and mixed-task (ES = 1.68, 95% CI = 1.26-2.11) was more effective than mirror-task (ES = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.14-0.78) and normal-task (ES = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.23-0.90). No significant difference was found between transfer from dominant limb (DL) to non-dominant limb (NDL) (ES = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.37-0.97) and NDL to DL (ES = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.59-1.15). Conclusion: This review concludes that MIT can serve as a valuable alternative or supplement to PT in facilitating BT effects. Notably, IMIT is preferable to EMIT, and interventions incorporating tasks that have access to both intrinsic and extrinsic coordinates (mixed-task) are preferred over those that involve only one of the two coordinates (mirror-task or normal-task). These findings have implications for rehabilitation of patients such as stroke survivors.
ABSTRACT
Objective: The current review was aimed to determine the effectiveness of mental imagery training (MIT) on the enhancement of maximum voluntary muscle contraction (MVC) force for healthy young and old adults. Data sources: Six electronic databases were searched from July 2021 to March 2022. Search terms included: "motor imagery training," "motor imagery practice," "mental practice," "mental training," "movement imagery," "cognitive training," "strength," "force," "muscle strength," "performance," "enhancement," "improvement," "development," and "healthy adults." Study selection and data extraction: Randomized controlled trials of MIT in enhancing muscle strength with healthy adults were selected. The decision on whether a study met the inclusion criteria of the review was made by two reviewers independently. Any disagreements between the two reviewers were first resolved by discussion between the two reviewers. If consensus could not be reached, then it would be arbitrated by a third reviewer. Data synthesis: Twenty-five studies including both internal MIT and external MIT were included in meta-analysis for determining the efficacy of MIT on enhancing muscle strength and 22 internal MIT were used for subgroup analysis for examining dose-response relationship of MIT on MVC. Results: MIT demonstrated significant benefit on enhancing muscle strength when compared with no exercise, Effect Size (ES), 1.10, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.89-1.30, favoring MIT, but was inferior to physical training (PT), ES, 0.38, 95% CI, 0.15-0.62, favoring PT. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that MIT was more effective for older adults (ES, 2.17, 95% CI, 1.57-2.76) than young adults (ES, 0.95, 95% CI, 0.74-1.17), p = 0.0002, and for small finger muscles (ES, 1.64, 95% CI, 1.06-2.22) than large upper extremity muscles (ES, 0.86, 95% CI, 0.56-1.16), p = 0.02. No significant difference was found in the comparison of small finger muscles and large lower extremity muscles, p = 0.19 although the ES of the former (ES, 1.64, 95% CI, 1.06-2.22) was greater than that of the later (ES, 1.20, 95%, 0.88-1.52). Conclusion: This review demonstrates that MIT has better estimated effects on enhancing MVC force compared to no exercise, but is inferior to PT. The combination of MIT and PT is equivalent to PT alone in enhancing muscle strength. The subgroup group analysis further suggests that older adults and small finger muscles may benefit more from MIT than young adults and larger muscles.
