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.