Skip to main content

Table 3 Effects of MI

From: Efficacy of motor imagery in post-stroke rehabilitation: a systematic review

Study Assessment Time of measurement Results
Liu [22] FMSA upper extremity subscales, CTT Pretest, Posttest after the inter-vention, follow-up after one month Not significant
  Trained Tasks, set 1   Not significant
  Trained tasks, set 2   significant
  Trained tasks, set 3   significant
  Untrained tasks   significant
  Trained tasks, set 3, follow up   significant
Page [25] FMSA, upper extremity subscales Two pretests within one week, one posttest after the intervention % Improvement MI group: 35.98 (10.17)
Controls: 21.15 (4.87)
No significance level is reported in this study.
Page [24] FMSA, upper extremity subscales Two pretest within one week, one posttest after the intervention Improvement: MI group: 13.8 Controls: 2.9
No significance level is reported in this study.
  ARAT   Improvement: MI group: 16.4 Controls: 0.7 No significance level is reported in this level.
Page [23] ARAT Two pretests within one week, one posttest after the intervention significant
  Motor Activity Log Amount of Use (AOU)   Improvement: MI group: 1.6 Controls: 0.4
No significance level is reported in this study.
  Motor Activity Log Quality of Movement (QOM)   MI group: 2.2 Controls: 0.2
No significance level is reported in this study.