Dyad motor learning in a wrist-robotic environment: Learning together is better than learning alone.

OBJECTIVE: Dyad motor practice is characterized by two learners alternating between physical and observational practice, which can lead to better motor outcomes and reduce practice time compared to physical practice alone. Robot-assisted therapy has become an established neurorehabilitation tool but is limited by high therapy cost and access. Implementing dyad practice in robot-assisted rehabilitation has the potential to improve therapeutic outcomes and/or to achieve them faster. This study aims to determine the effects of dyad practice on motor performance in a wrist-robotic environment to evaluate its potential use in robotic rehabilitation settings. METHODS: Forty-two healthy participants (18-35 years) were randomized into three groups (n = 14): Dyad practice, physical practice with rest and physical practice without rest. Participants practiced a 2 degree-of-freedom gamified wrist movement task for 20 trials using a custom-made wrist robotic device. A motor performance score (MPS) that captured temporal and spatial time-series kinematics was computed at baseline, the end of training and 24 h later to assess retention. RESULTS: MPS did not differ between groups at baseline. All groups revealed significant performance gains by the end of training. However, dyads outperformed the other groups at the end of training (p < 0.001) and showed higher retention after 24-h (p = 0.02). Median MPS improved by 46.5% in dyads, 25.3% in physical practice-rest, and 33.6% in physical practice-no rest at the end of training compared to baseline. CONCLUSION: Compared to physical practice alone, dyad practice leads to superior motor outcomes in a robot-assisted motor learning task. Dyads still outperformed their counterparts 24-h after practice. IMPACT STATEMENT: Improving motor function in complex motor tasks without increasing required practice time, dyad practice can optimize therapeutic resources. This is particularly impactful in robot-assisted rehabilitation regimens as it would help to improve patients' outcomes and increase care efficiency.

The Effectiveness of Proprioceptive Training for Improving Motor Performance and Motor Dysfunction: A Systematic Review.

Objective: Proprioceptive training is any intervention aiming to improve proprioceptive function with the ultimate goal to enhance motor function and performance. It has been promoted as an approach to enhance athletic performance and as a tool for sensorimotor rehabilitation. Numerous studies sought to provide evidence on the effectiveness of the approach. However, many different training regimes claiming to train proprioception report a variety of sensorimotor measures that are not directly comparable. This, in turn, makes it difficult to assess effectiveness across approaches. It is the objective of this study to systematically review recent empirical evidence to gain an understanding of which outcome measures are most sensitive, which populations may benefit most from proprioceptive training, and what are the effects on proprioceptive and motor systems. Methods: Four major databases were searched. The following inclusion criteria were applied: (1) A quantified pre- and post-treatment measure of proprioceptive function. (2) An intervention or training program believed to influence or enhance proprioceptive function. (3) Contained at least one form of treatment or outcome measure that is indicative of somatosensory function and not confounded by information from other sensory modalities. 4) The study reported of at least one quantified measure of motor performance. Results: Of the 3,297 articles identified by the database search, 70 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included for further review. Across studies, proprioceptive training led to comparable gains in both proprioceptive (+46%) and motor performance (+45%). The majority of studies (50/70) applied active movement interventions. Interventions applying somatosensory stimulation were most successful in clinical populations. Joint position sense error (JPSE) was the most commonly used proprioceptive measure and presents a reliable and feasible measure for clinical use. Conclusion: Proprioceptive training can lead to significant improvements in proprioceptive and motor function across a range healthy and clinical populations. Regimens requiring active movement of the trainee tended to be most successful in improving sensorimotor performance. Conclusive evidence on how long training gains are retained is still lacking. There is no solid evidence about the underlying long-term neuroplastic changes associated proprioceptive training.