Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to browse AJSM online!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
1545968307313508v1
22/4/385    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Onla-or, S. P.
Right arrow Articles by Winstein, C. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Onla-or, S. P.
Right arrow Articles by Winstein, C. J.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
First published on March 8, 2008, doi:10.1177/1545968307313508

Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 2008;22:385.

A more recent version of this article appeared on July 1, 2008


Article

Determining the Optimal Challenge Point for Motor Skill Learning in Adults with Moderately Severe Parkinson's Disease

Somporn Pan Onla-or* and Carolee J. Winstein

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: onlaor{at}chiangmai.ac.th.


   Abstract
Objective. To test the predictions of the Challenge Point Framework (CPF) for motor learning in individuals with Parkinson’s disease (PD) by manipulating nominal task difficulty and conditions of practice. Methods. Twenty adults with PD and 20 nondisabled controls practiced 3 variations of a laboratory-based goal-directed arm movement over 2 days. A between-group (PD, nondisabled) 2-factor design compared 2 levels of nominal task difficulty (low, high) and 2 levels of practice condition (low, high demand). Learning was assessed with a no-feedback recall test 1 day after practice. Performance was quantified using a root mean square error difference between the goal and participant-generated movement. Results. All participants improved with practice. Under the low-demand practice condition, adults with PD demonstrated comparable learning to that of controls when nominal task difficulty was low but not high. In contrast, under the high-demand practice condition, adults with PD demonstrated preserved motor learning for both levels of task difficulty, but only if recall was tested under the same context as that used during practice. Conclusions. In general, the predictions of CPF were supported. Together, the level of nominal task difficulty and the inherent demand of the practice condition played a critical role in determining the optimal challenge point for motor learning in individuals with PD. More important, and in contrast to the predictions of CPF, a high-demand practice condition appeared to have a facilitative effect on motor learning. However, this benefit revealed the context specificity of motor learning in adults with PD.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?