journal article Open Access Nov 28, 2024

Relationships Between Cognitive Impairments and Motor Learning After Stroke: A Scoping Review

View at Publisher Save 10.1177/15459683241300458
Abstract
Background
Stroke is one of the leading causes of chronic disability worldwide. Sensorimotor recovery relies on principles of motor learning for the improvement of movement and sensorimotor function after stroke. Motor learning engages several cognitive processes to effectively learn and retain new motor skills. However, cognitive impairments are common and often coexist with motor impairments after stroke. The specific relationships between poststroke cognitive impairments and motor learning have not been determined.


Objectives
To summarize the existing evidence related to cognitive impairments and motor learning after stroke. Specific goals were to determine: (1) how motor learning is studied in individuals with poststroke cognitive impairments; (2) how cognitive impairments are assessed; (3) which cognitive domains impact motor learning.


Results
Over 400 studies were screened for specific inclusion criteria and 19 studies that related poststroke cognitive impairments to motor learning were included. Studies used a wide variety of experimental designs, sample sizes, and measures for cognitive evaluation. Cognitive impairments impacting motor improvement and learning capacity after stroke were reported in all but 4 studies. The most common domains impacting motor learning were attention, executive function, and memory.


Conclusion
Detailed cognitive assessments, retention testing, and a combination of clinical and kinematic outcomes are recommended for future studies. The presence of specific cognitive impairments measured with sensitive instruments should be considered when designing effective training interventions for patients with stroke to maximize sensorimotor recovery.
Topics

No keywords indexed for this article. Browse by subject →

References
75
[1]
World Stroke Organization (WSO): Global Stroke Fact Sheet 2022

Valery L Feigin, Michael Brainin, Bo Norrving et al.

International Journal of Stroke 10.1177/17474930211065917
[8]
Challenge Point: A Framework for Conceptualizing the Effects of Various Practice Conditions in Motor Learning

Mark A. Guadagnoli, Timothy D. Lee

Journal of Motor Behavior 10.3200/jmbr.36.2.212-224
[11]
Neural constraints on learning

Patrick T. Sadtler, Kristin M. Quick, Matthew D. Golub et al.

Nature 10.1038/nature13665
[12]
Klavora P. Information processing in motor skills. In: Klavora P, ed. Foundations of Exercise Science Studying Human Movement and Health. 2nd ed. Sport Books Publisher; 2008:415-435.
[13]
Magill RA, Anderson DI. Motor learning and control: Concepts and Applications. 4th ed. McGraw-Hill Education; 2017.
[14]
The automaticity of complex motor skill learning as a function of attentional focus

Gabriele Wulf, Nancy McNevin, Charles H. Shea

The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology S... 10.1080/713756012
[22]
Fitts PM, Posner MI. Human Performance. Brooks/Cole, Belmont; 1967.
[23]
The importance of different learning stages for motor sequence learning after stroke

Christiane Dahms, Stefan Brodoehl, Otto W. Witte et al.

Human Brain Mapping 10.1002/hbm.24793
[25]
Individual Differences in Working Memory Capacity and Dual-Process Theories of the Mind.

Lisa Feldman Barrett, Michele M. Tugade, Randall W. Engle

Psychological Bulletin 10.1037/0033-2909.130.4.553
[33]
PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation

Andrea C. Tricco, Erin Lillie, Wasifa Zarin et al.

Annals of Internal Medicine 10.7326/m18-0850
[34]
Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework

Hilary Arksey, Lisa O'Malley

International Journal of Social Research Methodolo... 10.1080/1364557032000119616
[35]
Levac D, Colquhoun H, O’Brien KK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implementation Sci. 2010;5(69):1-9.
[36]
Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews

Micah D.J. Peters, Casey Marnie, Andrea C. Tricco et al.

JBI Evidence Implementation 10.1097/xeb.0000000000000277
[37]
Wells GA Shea B Connell OD et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of non-randomized studies in meta-analysis. 2000. Accessed January 20 2024. https://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp
[38]
RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

Jonathan A C Sterne, Jelena Savović, Matthew J Page et al.

BMJ 10.1136/bmj.l4898
[40]
The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

J. P. T. Higgins, D. G. Altman, P. C. Gotzsche et al.

BMJ 10.1136/bmj.d5928
[44]
Boe EW, Pedersen AD, Pedersen AR, Nielsen JF, Blicher JU. Cognitive status does not predict motor gain from post stroke constraint-induced movement therapy. NeuroRehabilitation. 2014;34(2014):201-207. 10.3233/nre-131011
[45]
Eschweiler M, Bohr L, Kessler J, Fink GR, Kalbe E, Onur OA. Combined cognitive and motor training improves the outcome in the early phase after stroke and prevents a decline of executive functions: a pilot study. NeuroRehabilitation. 2021;48(2021):97-108. 10.3233/nre-201583
[46]
Gerardin E, Bontemps D, Babuin NT, et al. Bimanual motor skill learning with robotics in chronic stroke: comparison between minimally impaired and moderately impaired patients, and healthy individuals. J NeuroEng Rehabil. 2022;19(28):1-13.

Showing 50 of 75 references

Metrics
11
Citations
75
References
Details
Published
Nov 28, 2024
Vol/Issue
39(2)
Pages
142-156
License
View
Cite This Article
Caroline M. Rajda, Katrina Desabrais, Mindy F. Levin (2024). Relationships Between Cognitive Impairments and Motor Learning After Stroke: A Scoping Review. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, 39(2), 142-156. https://doi.org/10.1177/15459683241300458
Related

You May Also Like