The effect of action observation and motor imagery on jumping and perceived performance.

Introduction: Action observation (AO) and motor imagery (MI) are cognitive processes that involve mentally rehearsing and simulating movements without physically performing them. However, the need for the evidence to support influence of imagery on performance is increasing. This study aims to investigate the impact of combining motor imagery with action observation on athletes' performance and performance perception. Method: Using a pre-test post-test design with a factorial setup, participants were randomly assigned to experimental and control groups. A pre-research power analysis determined the sample size, resulting in 21 voluntary participants (10 male). Opto Jump device recorded drop jump performance measurements, while participants predicted their performance post-motor imagery and action observation practices. The experimental group underwent an 8-week AOMI intervention program, involving 24-minute motor imagery sessions during video observation thrice weekly. Post-test measurements were taken after the intervention. Results: Results indicated no significant performance increase in the experimental group post-intervention, yet the group showed enhanced performance estimation following the video observation, but not in motor imagery condition. Conversely, this improvement was absent in the control group. Discussion: Although AOMI intervention didn't enhance physical performance, it has positively affected athletes' perception toward their performance. The findings are discussed in relation to existing literature.

Does rhinoplasty reduce nasal patency?

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of rhinoplasty on subjective and objective assessment of nasal patency in patients who underwent rhinoplasty for cosmetic reasons only. SETTING: Tertiary referral center. DESIGN: Prospective, clinical study. SUBJECT AND METHODS: A total of 50 adult patients who underwent rhinoplasty were included in the study. Preoperative and postoperative photographs of the nasal profile (frontal, lateral, and oblique) were obtained. The visual analog scale (VAS) was used for the subjective evaluation of nasal obstruction (0 being the minimum, 10 being the maximum amount of nasal patency). Objective evaluation of nasal obstruction was performed with a peak nasal inspiratory flowmeter (PNIF). RESULTS: Preoperative mean VAS scores and PNIF values of the patients were 7.36 ± 0.83 and 115.10 ± 17.45, respectively. Postoperative mean VAS scores and PNIF values of the patients were 7.42 ± 0.73 and 115.30 ± 16.7, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between any of the pre- and postoperative subjective and objective parameters (P > .05). CONCLUSION: Reduction rhinoplasty has been shown not to reduce nasal patency.