Mental Imagery: Comparison
View Latest Version
Please note this is a comparison between Version 2 by Camila Xu and Version 1 by Amit Abraham.

Mental imagery is a term used to describe the cognitive process of simulating sensations, actions, or other types of experiences through generating and using mental images, including metaphors.

  • mental imagery
  • motor
  • sensorimotor
  • sensory
  • dynamic neuro-cognitive imagery
  • motor imagery

1. Mental Imagery: Background

Mental imagery is a term used to describe the cognitive process of simulating sensations, actions, or other types of experiences [102][1] through generating and using mental images, including metaphors. Mental imagery can be performed in the absence of appropriate sensory input [103,104][2][3] or while the imaged stimulus is available to the imager [105,106,107][4][5][6]. When related to movement, mental imagery can be done with or without physical execution of the imaged movement [108,109][7][8] as well as while observing the movement performed by another individual or a video (aka “action observation”) [110,111][9][10]. A strong linear correlation exists between overt physical execution and mental imagery [112[11][12],113], spanning temporal (i.e., similarity in time to complete actual and imaged tasks) and spatial (i.e., activated neural pathways and brain regions) spheres [104,114,115][3][13][14]. Such similarities give rise to sensory and motor experiences and effects that are associated with both mental imagery and perception [68,116][15][16] and could explain mental-imagery-related effects on peripheral and central neural events, including in PwP [117][17]. Therefore, mental imagery appears to have potential as a means of approaching novel and learned motor tasks alike [118][18] and can be used for motor planning, execution, and control purposes, including performance enhancement. Among the advantages of mental imagery as a rehabilitation method are no risk of physical injury, independence of level of motor capability, high availability/accessibility, low financial costs, and no need for equipment. Furthermore, mental imagery can explicitly and precisely target various motor (e.g., range-of-motion [119][19]) and non-motor (i.e., sensory and cognitive) aspects of performance, including pain [119][19], motivation, and self-confidence [120][20]. Specifically relevant for PD, mental imagery can be used even when physical mobility is limited, such as in advanced stages of the disease. Mental imagery offers PwP and therapists a wide range of delivery possibilities: individually or in a group, and physically or remotely/virtually. These options make mental imagery highly relevant for various PD communities, including remote and under-served ones, thus addressing gaps and future directions identified by the previous literature [121,122,123][21][22][23].

Mental imagery’s mechanisms of effect are not fully understood and include both psychological and physiological ones [103,115,124][2][14][24]. Suggested psychological mechanisms of effect include facilitating cognitive elements regarding the skill (i.e., learning what to do), such as breaking down the skill into its components [125][25], attentional focus [124][24], (Gose and Abraham, under review), and different execution patterns to promote learning of movement strategies [92,115][26][14]. Suggested physiological mechanisms of effect include neural changes in the central nervous system, resulting in greater relaxation and altered programming of the motor system [126][27].

Given that: (1) perception relies on motor action [91,127][28][29]; and (2) motor functioning is impacted by somatosensory information [17][30], mental imagery could serve as a promising rehabilitative approach toward improving both perceptual–cognitive and motor functioning. This is based on mental imagery’s engagement of neural circuits that overlap with overt motor execution [124,128][24][31]; and on MI’s reliance on and usage of sensory and somatosensory (i.e., kinesthetic and proprioceptive) information [128,129][31][32]. Further, prior studies [107,130][6][33] and evidence obtained from a focus group of PwP indicate that the self-selected use of mental imagery in everyday activities [131][34] support the benefits that may stem from integrating mental imagery in PD rehabilitation.

Two subtypes of mental imagery are motor imagery practice (MIP) and dynamic neuro-cognitive imagery (DNI). MIP, which consists of the mental rehearsal of a motor act without overt physical execution, is the most widely used and researched approach to mental imagery [115,124,132][14][24][35]. Less well known and less studied is DNI, a systematized mental imagery method for motor and cognitive retraining which was adapted from “the Franklin Method” [133,134][36][37]. DNI utilizes a variety of mental imagery categories (e.g., emotional, anatomical, biomechanical, metaphorical), modalities (e.g., visual, kinesthetic, auditory) and mental-imagery-related assistive tools (e.g., self-touch [135][38] and self-talk [136][39]). DNI combines mental imagery (including MIP) with actual movement execution within various motor contexts, ranging from basic activities of daily living (e.g., standing up from a chair, lifting arms) to more advanced functions (e.g., single-leg balance, turning) [130][33]. The DNI pedagogical process introduces participants to the concept of mental imagery, its advantages and ease of use, and teaches them various ways to utilize it along with motor performance during functional tasks (e.g., sitting down, standing up, walking and turning). In doing so, DNI addresses various cognitive aspects associated with motor planning and performance, such as efficiency, proprioception, body schema, attentional focus, and dual tasking. The beneficial effects of DNI on motor and non-motor functions have been recently demonstrated in dancers and PwP [106,107,130][5][6][33]. Given that DNI, unlike MIP, has been empirically studied only in recent years and is less known by both clinicians and researchers, the current paper focuses on introducing its qualities that may be specifically relevant for PD rehabilitation and that should be further investigated.

2. The Suitability of Mental Imagery for PD Rehabilitation

Mental imagery is a recommended method for neurorehabilitation [137,138][40][41] and is especially promising for PD rehabilitation [99,139,140,141][42][43][44][45] as supported by: (1) its core role in motor, sensorimotor, and cognitive functioning [142[46][47][48],143,144], and (2) its ability to reproduce [145][49] and even potentially enhance [105][4] availability and quality of afferent sensory information from the body, including specific tissues and body parts [105][4]. Care should be taken to ensure that individuals with cognitive symptoms receive an appropriate neuro-psychiatric assessment to verify that they may benefit from a mental imagery approach. For those with adequate cognitive capacity, mental imagery may play a role in sensory re-weighting processes [146,147][50][51] relevant for gait, balance, and pain. The following sections specifically review evidence to date regarding the use mental imagery in each of these areas.

3. Mental Imagery to Address Gait in PD

PwP maintain the ability to image walking tasks as evidenced by performance on the Gait Imagery Questionnaire [148][52], which assesses visual and kinesthetic motor imagery. The ability to mentally image gait vividly and accurately is similar in PwP and controls and does not seem to correlate with actual walking performance, though PwP may perform mental imagery tasks more slowly than controls [90][53]. Mental imagery speed and vividness may be enhanced through use of visual cues [149][54] and potentially through using action observation [110,111][9][10]. The preserved ability for mental imagery and use of cueing suggests that even those with poor walking performance may still be able to image walking effectively and therefore potentially benefit from mental imagery as a strategy to compensate for gait impairments [150][55]. However, patterns of brain activation during imaged walking differ between controls and PwP. For example, those with PD have reduced activity in globus pallidus and increased activity in the supplementary motor area during imaged gait, particularly for complex tasks like imaged turning [151][56] and imaged backward walking [152][57]. Both reports did not provide details regarding the type of imagery used. Of note, the investigation of imaged visual cues (i.e., using the mental image of the visual cue without it being perceptually available) and its potential benefits on gait in PwP is at its infancy [107,130][6][33].

Among PwP with FOG, there is evidence of alterations in motor imagery that are not noted in those without FOG. Neuroimaging studies suggest that during imaged walking, those with FOG have greater activity in the mesencephalic locomotor region than those without freezing of gait, and this hyperactivity in MLR correlates with severity and duration of FOG [153][58]. Those with FOG have also been noted to have reduced activity in the globus pallidus during mentally imaged gait [154][59]. Perceptual motor studies demonstrate a mismatch between imaged and actual walking times when passing through doorways [155][60], a problem that may be uniquely associated with FOG. It remains to be seen whether training in mental imagery could facilitate different brain activation patterns that rely less on the MLR and/or a better match between mentally imagined and actual walking times and be used as a means of addressing FOG.

Relatively few studies have directly asked whether mental imagery training can improve walking performance in PwP. We think that the area holds much promise and emerging evidence supports the use of DNI for this purpose [107,130][6][33]. DNI not only provides the combination of mental imagery and movement, it also provides participants with mental imagery-based cues which are based on scientific information (e.g., anatomy, biomechanics, motor control) that may help individuals with mental imagery use and retrieval when necessary in their daily life functioning which includes gait tasks [149][54]. Specifically, the DNI process allows for the conversion of externally-generated cues, known to be effective for PwP [156[61][62],157], into internally-generated ones. Internally-generated cues are readily accessible, enhance autonomy and self-empowerment, and are known to be effective for improving walking [71][63]. Furthermore, DNI delivered over multiple sessions across multiple weeks improved mental imagery abilities as well as motor and spatial cognitive functions relevant to gait [130][33]. Similarly, a 12-week program of combined visual–kinesthetic motor imagery practice combined with physical practice proved superior to a physical practice only condition for improving bradykinesia during the Timed Up and Go task [141][45]. However, a single session of MIP with a kinesthetic emphasis did not result in effects on gait [158][64]. Another study found that visual MIP was no different from relaxation in terms of effects on gait in a 6-week intervention [159][65]. Clearly, the verdict is still out as to the best mental imagery approach (including content, modality, perspective, etc.) for use in PD rehabilitation and additional evidence is needed. Related to this, a recent survey showed that only 60% of healthcare professionals have an awareness of mental imagery as a strategy to address gait impairments in PD, and only 45% of them actually apply mental imagery within their practice [160][66].

4. Mental Imagery to Address Balance in PD

Mental imagery could be an advantageous method for balance retraining in PwP as it can explicitly address specific psychological (e.g., self-confidence, attentional focus, and self-efficacy) [161][67] and motor (e.g., center of mass, base of support, and central axis) [162,163][68][69] determinants associated with balance. Mental imagery’s specificity was further demonstrated via resultant brain activity which corresponded with the varying levels of difficulty of an imaged balance task [143][47]. This sensitivity of mental imagery [139][43] adds to its potential for specificity in balance retraining, a component previously recommended in PD rehabilitation [97][70].

Studies assessing the effect of mental imagery training on balance measures in PwP are limited. In a study assessing the effect of group treatment of combined MIP–physical therapy versus physical therapy only, positive trends toward improvements in balance were noted in the combined group [141][45]. In a case-study of a single participant with PD, a 3-month neurocognitive rehabilitation program involving mental imagery which included 20 sessions (one hour each, twice per week; no further details regarding the type of imagery were provided) resulted in improvements in balance and reduction of risk of falls during both “OFF” and “ON” phases, as measured with the Tinetti Balance and Gait Evaluation Scale [164][71]. In another study, the effect of a 2-week DNI compared to reading and exercise interventions on balance (using self-reported questionnaires) and balance confidence (using the Activities-Specific Balance Confidence Scale) in individuals with mild–moderate PD [130][33] was examined and no significant differences between groups were noted following the intervention. However, participants in the DNI group reported self-perceived improvements in balance following the intervention [130][33].

5. Mental Imagery to Address Pain in PD

People with pain, who do not have PD, have reported vivid mental images associated with their pain [165][72]. Additionally, the mental images of pain were associated with anxiety, depression, and catastrophizing [165][72]. Mental imagery training has the potential to influence the sensory and emotional experience in people with pain. Volz and colleagues suggest that mental imagery may alter motor cortex activity resulting in pain modulation [166][73].

Studies using mental imagery as a means for reducing pain in PwP are limited. In one study, investigators studied the effect of DNI on mental imagery ability, PD severity, and motor and non-motor function in PwP [130][33]. While participants in this study demonstrated improvements in mental imagery ability as well as motor and cognitive functions, pain, as measured by the Brief Pain Inventory, was unchanged [130][33]. However, the DNI intervention did not specifically address pain or pain-related aspects. There is also a case report in which a participant with PD completed 20 sessions of neurocognitive rehabilitation with motor imagery [164][71]. In this intervention, the participant performed motor imagery of functional movements (e.g., sit to stand, walking) prior to physical performance of these tasks. There is no specific mention of mental imagery components to target pain. The participant reported, via the Visual Analog Scale, a 5.3-point reduction in pain following the intervention. Pain was further reduced at the 3-month follow-up visit. It is important to note that the authors state the lower limb pain in the participant with PD was a freezing prodrome, which may not be representative of the musculoskeletal pain experienced in PwP.

In PwP with chronic pain, the description of their pain experience may generate mental images. Specifically, PwP may report a distorted body schema [89][74]. This may extend to PwP who have LBP. Abraham and colleagues used self-drawn pelvic drawings to demonstrate that people with PD have the ability to change their misperceived body schema following an intensive 2-week DNI training [107][6]. However, whether there is a relationship between distorted body schema and pain and whether pain changes in response to a change in perceived body schema is unclear in PwP. Further, PwP with LBP report that LBP impacts their ability to perform activities like standing, lifting, walking, and sleeping [63][75]. It is unclear whether pain during these activities causes PwP with LBP to generate mental images associated with that pain. Better understanding of physical, sensory, and emotional aspects of the PwP in pain could aid the development of customized mental imagery programs targeted at reducing pain. Much work remains to be done to determine the type and content of mental imagery that is most effective for pain reduction in PwP. Given that there are multiple types of pain in PwP, future work should determine which forms of mental imagery are most effective for different pain syndromes in PwP. Further, investigators should seek to understand how mental imagery influences the known neurophysiologic mechanisms of pain in PwP. Despite the lack of evidence supporting the efficacy of mental imagery to reduce pain in PD, further investigation is warranted because it appears to be safe, low risk, and highly accessible for both PwP and therapists.

References

  1. Moran, A.; Guillot, A.; MacIntyre, T.; Collet, C. Re-imagining motor imagery: Building bridges between cognitive neuroscience and sport psychology: Re-imagining motor imagery. Br. J. Psychol. 2012, 103, 224–247.
  2. Guillot, A.; Collet, C. Contribution from neurophysiological and psychological methods to the study of motor imagery. Brain Res. Rev. 2005, 50, 387–397.
  3. Munzert, J.; Lorey, B.; Zentgraf, K. Cognitive motor processes: The role of motor imagery in the study of motor representations. Brain Res. Rev. 2009, 60, 306–326.
  4. Abraham, A.; Franklin, E.; Stecco, C.; Schleip, R. Integrating mental imagery and fascial tissue: A conceptualization for research into movement and cognition. Complement. Ther. Clin. Pract. 2020, 40, 101193.
  5. Abraham, A.; Gose, R.; Schindler, R.; Nelson, B.H.; Hackney, M.E. Dynamic Neuro-Cognitive Imagery (DNITM) Improves Developpé Performance, Kinematics, and Mental Imagery Ability in University-Level Dance Students. Front. Psychol. 2019, 10, 382.
  6. Abraham, A.; Hart, A.; Dickstein, R.; Hackney, M.E. “Will you draw me a pelvis?” Dynamic neuro-cognitive imagery improves pelvic schema and graphic-metric representation in people with Parkinsonʼs Disease: A randomized controlled trial. Complement. Ther. Med. 2019, 43, 28–35.
  7. Fusco, A.; Iasevoli, L.; Iosa, M.; Gallotta, M.C.; Padua, L.; Tucci, L.; Antonucci, G.; Baldari, C.; Guidetti, L. Dynamic motor imagery mentally simulates uncommon real locomotion better than static motor imagery both in young adults and elderly. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0218378.
  8. Guillot, A.; Moschberger, K.; Collet, C. Coupling movement with imagery as a new perspective for motor imagery practice. Behav. Brain Funct. 2013, 9, 8.
  9. Bek, J.; Gowen, E.; Vogt, S.; Crawford, T.J.; Poliakoff, E. Combined action observation and motor imagery influences hand movement amplitude in Parkinson’s disease. Park. Relat. Disord. 2019, 61, 126–131.
  10. Eaves, D.L.; Riach, M.; Holmes, P.S.; Wright, D.J. Motor Imagery during Action Observation: A Brief Review of Evidence, Theory and Future Research Opportunities. Front. Neurosci. 2016, 10, 514.
  11. Borst, G.; Kosslyn, S.M. Visual mental imagery and visual perception: Structural equivalence revealed by scanning processes. Mem. Cogn. 2008, 36, 849–862.
  12. Kosslyn, S.M.; Ganis, G.; Thompson, W.L. Neural foundations of imagery. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2001, 2, 635–642.
  13. Karklinsky, M.; Flash, T. Timing of continuous motor imagery: The two-thirds power law originates in trajectory planning. J. Neurophysiol. 2015, 113, 2490–2499.
  14. Lotze, M.; Halsband, U. Motor imagery. J. Physiol. Paris 2006, 99, 386–395.
  15. Moseley, G.L.; Zalucki, N.; Birklein, F.; Marinus, J.; van Hilten, J.J.; Luomajoki, H. Thinking about movement hurts: The effect of motor imagery on pain and swelling in people with chronic arm pain. Arthritis Rheum. 2008, 59, 623–631.
  16. Avanzino, L.; Giannini, A.; Tacchino, A.; Pelosin, E.; Ruggeri, P.; Bove, M. Motor imagery influences the execution of repetitive finger opposition movements. Neurosci. Lett. 2009, 466, 11–15.
  17. Lim, V.K.; Polych, M.A.; Holländer, A.; Byblow, W.D.; Kirk, I.J.; Hamm, J.P. Kinesthetic but not visual imagery assists in normalizing the CNV in Parkinson’s disease. Clin. Neurophysiol. 2006, 117, 2308–2314.
  18. Magill, R.A.; Anderson, D. Motor Learning and Control: Concepts and Applications, 11th ed.; McGraw-Hill Education: New York, NY, USA, 2017; ISBN 978-1-259-82399-2.
  19. Yap, B.W.D.; Lim, E.C.W. The Effects of Motor Imagery on Pain and Range of Motion in Musculoskeletal Disorders: A Systematic Review Using Meta-Analysis. Clin. J. Pain 2019, 35, 87–99.
  20. Paivio, A. Cognitive and motivational functions of imagery in human performance. Can. J. Appl. Sport Sci. 1985, 10, 22S–28S.
  21. Au, K.L.; Giacobbe, A.; Dinh, E.; Nguyen, O.; Moore, K.; Zamora, A.R.; Okun, M.; De Almeida, L.B. Underserved Patient Access to Multidisciplinary Rehabilitation for Movement Disorders in a Single Tertiary Academic Referral Center. (2830). Neurology 2020, 94, 2830.
  22. Dorsey, E.R.; Vlaanderen, F.P.; Engelen, L.J.; Kieburtz, K.; Zhu, W.; Biglan, K.M.; Faber, M.J.; Bloem, B.R. Moving Parkinson care to the home: Moving Parkinson Care To The Home. Mov. Disord. 2016, 31, 1258–1262.
  23. Isernia, S.; Di Tella, S.; Pagliari, C.; Jonsdottir, J.; Castiglioni, C.; Gindri, P.; Salza, M.; Gramigna, C.; Palumbo, G.; Molteni, F.; et al. Effects of an Innovative Telerehabilitation Intervention for People With Parkinson’s Disease on Quality of Life, Motor, and Non-motor Abilities. Front. Neurol. 2020, 11, 846.
  24. Decety, J. The neurophysiological basis of motor imagery. Behav. Brain Res. 1996, 77, 45–52.
  25. Stevens, J.A. Interference effects demonstrate distinct roles for visual and motor imagery during the mental representation of human action. Cognition 2005, 95, 329–350.
  26. Schmidt, R.A.; Lee, T.D. Motor Control and Learning: A Behavioral Emphasis, 5th ed.; Human Kinetics: Champaign, IL, USA, 2011; ISBN 978-0-7360-7961-7.
  27. Yue, G.; Cole, K.J. Strength increases from the motor program: Comparison of training with maximal voluntary and imagined muscle contractions. J. Neurophysiol. 1992, 67, 1114–1123.
  28. Kleinfeld, D.; Ahissar, E.; Diamond, M.E. Active sensation: Insights from the rodent vibrissa sensorimotor system. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 2006, 16, 435–444.
  29. Schroeder, C.E.; Wilson, D.A.; Radman, T.; Scharfman, H.; Lakatos, P. Dynamics of Active Sensing and perceptual selection. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 2010, 20, 172–176.
  30. Halperin, O.; Israeli-Korn, S.; Yakubovich, S.; Hassin-Baer, S.; Zaidel, A. Self-motion perception in Parkinson’s disease. Eur. J. Neurosci. 2020.
  31. Porro, C.A.; Francescato, M.P.; Cettolo, V.; Diamond, M.E.; Baraldi, P.; Zuiani, C.; Bazzocchi, M.; di Prampero, P.E. Primary Motor and Sensory Cortex Activation during Motor Performance and Motor Imagery: A Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study. J. Neurosci. 1996, 16, 7688–7698.
  32. McCormick, K.; Zalucki, N.; Hudson, M.L.; Lorimer Moseley, G. Faulty proprioceptive information disrupts motor imagery: An experimental study. Aust. J. Physiother. 2007, 53, 41–45.
  33. Abraham, A.; Hart, A.; Andrade, I.; Hackney, M.E. Dynamic Neuro-Cognitive Imagery Improves Mental Imagery Ability, Disease Severity, and Motor and Cognitive Functions in People with Parkinson’s Disease. Neural Plast. 2018, 2018, 6168507.
  34. Bek, J.; Webb, J.; Gowen, E.; Vogt, S.; Crawford, T.J.; Sullivan, M.S.; Poliakoff, E. Patients’ Views on a Combined Action Observation and Motor Imagery Intervention for Parkinson’s Disease. Park. Dis. 2016, 2016, 7047910.
  35. Jeannerod, M. Mental imagery in the motor context. Neuropsychologia 1995, 33, 1419–1432.
  36. Franklin, E.N. Dynamic Alignment through Imagery, 2nd ed.; Human Kinetics: Champaign, IL, USA, 2012; ISBN 978-0-7360-6789-8.
  37. Franklin, E.N. Dance Imagery for Technique and Performance, 2nd ed.; Human Kinetics: Champaign, IL, USA, 2014; ISBN 978-0-7360-6788-1.
  38. Conson, M.; Mazzarella, E.; Trojano, L. Self-touch affects motor imagery: A study on posture interference effect. Exp. Brain Res. 2011, 215, 115–122.
  39. Theodorakis, Y.; Weinberg, R.; Natsis, P.; Douma, I.; Kazakas, P. The Effects of Motivational versus Instructional Self-Talk on Improving Motor Performance. Sport Psychol. 2000, 14, 253–271.
  40. Bovend’Eerdt, T.J.; Dawes, H.; Sackley, C.; Izadi, H.; Wade, D.T. An Integrated Motor Imagery Program to Improve Functional Task Performance in Neurorehabilitation: A Single-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2010, 91, 939–946.
  41. Dickstein, R.; Deutsch, J.E. Motor Imagery in Physical Therapist Practice. Phys. Ther. 2007, 87, 942–953.
  42. Mirelman, A.; Maidan, I.; Deutsch, J.E. Virtual reality and motor imagery: Promising tools for assessment and therapy in Parkinson’s disease: Virtual Reality and Motor Imagery for PD. Mov. Disord. 2013, 28, 1597–1608.
  43. Abbruzzese, G.; Avanzino, L.; Marchese, R.; Pelosin, E. Action Observation and Motor Imagery: Innovative Cognitive Tools in the Rehabilitation of Parkinson’s Disease. Park. Dis. 2015, 2015, 124214.
  44. Caligiore, D.; Mustile, M.; Spalletta, G.; Baldassarre, G. Action observation and motor imagery for rehabilitation in Parkinson’s disease: A systematic review and an integrative hypothesis. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2017, 72, 210–222.
  45. Tamir, R.; Dickstein, R.; Huberman, M. Integration of Motor Imagery and Physical Practice in Group Treatment Applied to Subjects With Parkinson’s Disease. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 2007, 21, 68–75.
  46. Annett, J. Motor imagery: Perception or action? Neuropsychologia 1995, 33, 1395–1417.
  47. Ferraye, M.U.; Debû, B.; Heil, L.; Carpenter, M.; Bloem, B.R.; Toni, I. Using Motor Imagery to Study the Neural Substrates of Dynamic Balance. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e91183.
  48. Hétu, S.; Grégoire, M.; Saimpont, A.; Coll, M.-P.; Eugène, F.; Michon, P.-E.; Jackson, P.L. The neural network of motor imagery: An ALE meta-analysis. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2013, 37, 930–949.
  49. Mulder, T. Motor imagery and action observation: Cognitive tools for rehabilitation. J. Neural Transm 2007, 114, 1265–1278.
  50. Feller, K.J.; Peterka, R.J.; Horak, F.B. Sensory Re-weighting for Postural Control in Parkinson’s Disease. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2019, 13, 126.
  51. Mahboobin, A.; Loughlin, P.J.; Redfern, M.S.; Sparto, P.J. Sensory re-weighting in human postural control during moving-scene perturbations. Exp. Brain Res. 2005, 167, 260–267.
  52. Pickett, K.A.; Peterson, D.S.; Earhart, G.M. Motor imagery of gait tasks in individuals with Parkinson disease. J. Park. Dis. 2012, 2, 19–22.
  53. Heremans, E.; Feys, P.; Nieuwboer, A.; Vercruysse, S.; Vandenberghe, W.; Sharma, N.; Helsen, W. Motor Imagery Ability in Patients With Early- and Mid-Stage Parkinson Disease. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 2011, 25, 168–177.
  54. Heremans, E.; Nieuwboer, A.; Feys, P.; Vercruysse, S.; Vandenberghe, W.; Sharma, N.; Helsen, W.F. External Cueing Improves Motor Imagery Quality in Patients With Parkinson Disease. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 2012, 26, 27–35.
  55. Nonnekes, J.; Ružicka, E.; Nieuwboer, A.; Hallett, M.; Fasano, A.; Bloem, B.R. Compensation Strategies for Gait Impairments in Parkinson Disease: A Review. JAMA Neurol. 2019, 76, 718–725.
  56. Peterson, D.S.; Pickett, K.A.; Duncan, R.P.; Perlmutter, J.S.; Earhart, G.M. Brain activity during complex imagined gait tasks in Parkinson disease. Clin. Neurophysiol. 2014, 125, 995–1005.
  57. Myers, P.S.; McNeely, M.E.; Pickett, K.A.; Duncan, R.P.; Earhart, G.M. Effects of exercise on gait and motor imagery in people with Parkinson disease and freezing of gait. Park. Relat. Disord. 2018, 53, 89–95.
  58. Snijders, A.H.; Leunissen, I.; Bakker, M.; Overeem, S.; Helmich, R.C.; Bloem, B.R.; Toni, I. Gait-related cerebral alterations in patients with Parkinson’s disease with freezing of gait. Brain 2011, 134, 59–72.
  59. Peterson, D.S.; Pickett, K.A.; Duncan, R.; Perlmutter, J.; Earhart, G.M. Gait-related brain activity in people with Parkinson disease with freezing of gait. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e90634.
  60. Cohen, R.G.; Chao, A.; Nutt, J.G.; Horak, F.B. Freezing of gait is associated with a mismatch between motor imagery and motor execution in narrow doorways, not with failure to judge doorway passability. Neuropsychologia 2011, 49, 3981–3988.
  61. Lim, I.; van Wegen, E.; de Goede, C.; Deutekom, M.; Nieuwboer, A.; Willems, A.; Jones, D.; Rochester, L.; Kwakkel, G. Effects of external rhythmical cueing on gait in patients with Parkinson’s disease: A systematic review. Clin. Rehabil. 2005, 19, 695–713.
  62. Lu, C.; Amundsen Huffmaster, S.L.; Tuite, P.J.; Vachon, J.M.; MacKinnon, C.D. Effect of Cue Timing and Modality on Gait Initiation in Parkinson Disease With Freezing of Gait. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2017, 98, 1291–1299.e1.
  63. Harrison, E.C.; Horin, A.P.; Earhart, G.M. Internal cueing improves gait more than external cueing in healthy adults and people with Parkinson disease. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 15525.
  64. Santiago, L.M.D.M.; de Oliveira, D.A.; de Macêdo Ferreira, L.G.L.; de Brito Pinto, H.Y.; Spaniol, A.P.; de Lucena Trigueiro, L.C.; Ribeiro, T.S.; de Sousa, A.V.C.; Piemonte, M.E.P.; Lindquist, A.R.R. Immediate effects of adding mental practice to physical practice on the gait of individuals with Parkinson’s disease: Randomized clinical trial. NRE 2015, 37, 263–271.
  65. Braun, S.; Beurskens, A.; Kleynen, M.; Schols, J.; Wade, D. Rehabilitation with mental practice has similar effects on mobility as rehabilitation with relaxation in people with Parkinson’s disease: A multicentre randomised trial. J. Physiother. 2011, 57, 27–34.
  66. Tosserams, A.; Nijkrake, M.J.; Sturkenboom, I.H.W.M.; Bloem, B.R.; Nonnekes, J. Perceptions of Compensation Strategies for Gait Impairments in Parkinson’s Disease: A Survey Among 320 Healthcare Professionals. J. Park. Dis. 2020, 10, 1775–1778.
  67. Myers, A.M.; Powell, L.E.; Maki, B.E.; Holliday, P.J.; Brawley, L.R.; Sherk, W. Psychological Indicators of Balance Confidence: Relationship to Actual and Perceived Abilities. J. Gerontol. Ser. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci. 1996, 51A, M37–M43.
  68. Benda, B.J.; Riley, P.O.; Krebs, D.E. Biomechanical relationship between center of gravity and center of pressure during standing. IEEE Trans. Rehab. Eng. 1994, 2, 3–10.
  69. Le Huec, J.C.; Saddiki, R.; Franke, J.; Rigal, J.; Aunoble, S. Equilibrium of the human body and the gravity line: The basics. Eur. Spine J. 2011, 20, 558–563.
  70. Abbruzzese, G.; Marchese, R.; Avanzino, L.; Pelosin, E. Rehabilitation for Parkinson’s disease: Current outlook and future challenges. Park. Relat. Disord. 2016, 22, S60–S64.
  71. Zangrando, F.; Piccinini, G.; Pelliccioni, A.; Saraceni, V.M.; Paolucci, T. Neurocognitive Rehabilitation in Parkinson’s Disease with Motor Imagery: A Rehabilitative Experience in a Case Report. Case Rep. Med. 2015, 2015, 670385.
  72. Gillanders, D.; Potter, L.; Morris, P.G. Pain related-visual imagery is associated with distress in chronic pain sufferers. Behav. Cogn. Psychother. 2012, 40, 577–589.
  73. Volz, M.S.; Suarez-Contreras, V.; Portilla, A.L.S.; Fregni, F. Mental imagery-induced attention modulates pain perception and cortical excitability. BMC Neurosci. 2015, 16, 15.
  74. Bissolotti, L.; Isacco-Grassi, F.; Orizio, C.; Gobbo, M.; Berjano, P.; Villafañe, J.H.; Negrini, S. Spinopelvic balance and body image perception in Parkinson’s disease: Analysis of correlation. Eur. Spine J. 2015, 24, 898–905.
  75. Duncan, R.P.; Van Dillen, L.R.; Garbutt, J.M.; Earhart, G.M.; Perlmutter, J.S. Low Back Pain--Related Disability in Parkinson Disease: Impact on Functional Mobility, Physical Activity, and Quality of Life. Phys. Ther. 2019, 99, 1346–1353.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
ScholarVision Creations
Feedback