Filtering by
- All Subjects: stroke
- Creators: Rogalsky, Corianne
- Creators: Helms Tillery, Stephen
The purpose of this study is to know whether the primary motor cortex (M1) plays a role in the sensorimotor memory. It was hypothesized that temporary disruption of the M1 following the learning to minimize a tilt using a ‘L’ shaped object would negatively affect the retention of sensorimotor memory and thus reduce interference between the memory acquired in one context and the visual cues to perform the same task in a different context.
Significant findings were shown in blocks 1, 2, and 4. In block 3, subjects displayed insignificant amount of learning. However, it cannot be concluded that there is full interference in block 3. Therefore, looked into 3 effects in statistical analysis: the main effects of the blocks, the main effects of the trials, and the effects of the blocks and trials combined. From the block effects, there is a p-value of 0.001, and from the trial effects, the p-value is less than 0.001. Both of these effects indicate that there is learning occurring. However, when looking at the blocks * trials effects, we see a p-value of 0.002 < 0.05 indicating significant interaction between sensorimotor memories. Based on the results that were found, there is a presence of interference in all the blocks but not enough to justify the use of TMS in order to reduce interference because there is a partial reduction of interference from the control experiment. It is evident that the time delay might be the issue between context switches. By reducing the time delay between block 2 and 3 from 10 minutes to 5 minutes, I will hope to see significant learning to occur from the first trial to the second trial.
Does training in the upper extremity domain with startle translate to the speech domain post-stroke?
The aim of this study was to assess whether exposing individuals who are 6-month post-stroke with an upper extremity motor deficit and some form of speech impairment (aphasia and/or apraxia) to upper extremity training utilizing Startle Adjuvant Rehabilitation Therapy (START) would result in improvement in symptoms of speech impairment. It was hypothesized that while scores on Diadochokinetic Rate (a measure of apraxia) and Repetition (a measure of aphasia) would improve by timepoint with START as compared to the Control group, measures of aphasia including Spontaneous Speech, Auditory Verbal Comprehension, and Naming would not be different in scores by timepoint. Subjects were recruited from two separate ongoing studies consisting of three days of similar upper extremity training on certain functional tasks with and without START and the speech assessments utilized were pulled from the Western Aphasia Battery (Revised) and Apraxia Battery for Adults 2nd Edition. It was found that there were no statistically significant differences by timepoint in either condition for any of the speech assessments. This proof-of-concept study is the first to assess whether the StartReact effect, when applied to the upper extremity domain, will translate into measurable improvements in speech impairment despite the lack of any speech training.