|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||
EDITORIAL COMMENTARY |
| Neuroplasticity and rehabilitation |
Centre for Cognitive Neuroscience, School of Psychology, University of Wales, Bangor LL57 2AS and Walton Centre for Neurology and Neurosurgery, Liverpool L9 7LJ, UK
Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
R M Bracewell;
m.bracewell@bangor.ac.uk
Accepted for publication 1 July 2003
Keywords: neuroplasticity; rehabilitation; stroke
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
It is good to see that stroke, and in particular stroke rehabilitation, is losing its Cinderella status in the world of neurology. In this issue, Cauraugh and Kim (p 000) present the results of some recent work on the rehabilitation of arm function in chronic stroke patients.1 This work touches on several areas of interest to both clinicians and basic scientists.
Their work was in part motivated by suggestions in the motor learning literature that the repetitive practice of the same action ("blocked" practice) may be inferior to practising different actions ("random" practice). If this were so, then it would have important implications for everyday clinical practice, in which patients are typically required to perform the same action time and again (the equivalent of blocked practice). With the particular training schemes used, however, no difference was found between the two groups.
A more positive result came
Related Article
J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry 2003 74: 1562-1566.
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS | REGISTER |