Exploring the utility of resistance training for congenital mirror movement disorder
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
College of Kinesiology Research Theme: Human Performance Introduction: Congenital mirror movement (CMM) disorder is a very rare condition (<1 in a million) where voluntary limb movements trigger involuntary mirroring in the opposite limb. This study examined whether four weeks of unilateral resistance training, followed by 10 days of detraining, affects mirroring activity and cross-education effects (i.e., strength gain in the untrained opposite limb) in individuals with CMM. Methods: Two right-handed participants (both male; age 18 and 47) reporting CMM completed four weeks of maximal unilateral isometric grip training of the left hand, three times per week using a grip trainer (Digiflex), followed by 10 days of detraining. Training sessions increased from two to five sets of eight maximal repetitions per session. Participants completed testing for grip strength and muscle activation at baseline, mid-training, post-training, and after detraining. Testing included three brief 3-second maximal voluntary contractions (MVC) and a 1-minute MVC contraction of each hand. MVC force (kg) was measured using Jamar and Biopac grip dynamometers, while simultaneous EMG recordings captured muscle activity from the flexor carpi radialis, extensor carpi radialis, and flexor digitorum superficialis of both arms. Results: Due to the low sample size in this study (on account of the rare condition), only descriptive results are reported. After left-hand training, left grip strength increased in the first participant by ~12% and remained ~6% above baseline after detraining. Strength in the untrained right arm improved ~17% and increased to ~23% above baseline after detraining, indicative of cross-education. The second participant showed a modest increase of ~6% by the end of detraining and no cross-education. Both participants showed substantial mirroring force and EMG activity in the opposite limb during 1-minute MVC contractions of either hand. Mirroring force in the right hand during a 1-minute left MVC was ~20% MVC for both participants at baseline and decreased by almost half at the end of detraining. Mirroring force in the left hand during 1-minute right MVC was ~40% MVC and ~20% MVC for each participant, respectively, and decreased by almost half after detraining. EMG activation of the right hand during the left 1-minute MVC ranged from 67% to 82% MVC at baseline, with little change after training, and then increased after detraining. EMG activation of the left hand during the right 1-minute MVC was in the range of 80% MVC and tended to increase post-training, but reverted to baseline or lower after detraining. Conclusion: In two participants, unilateral grip training reduced mirroring force and improved strength, with signs of cross-education. However, muscle activation responses varied, and detraining effects were inconsistent. Further research, with larger samples and a longer intervention period, is needed to understand individual differences and long-term benefits for CMM. Acknowledgements: A special thank you to the participants with CMM who dedicated a considerable amount of time to training and testing for this study and to fellow students in Dr. Farthing’s lab.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».