Author | Experimental group | Control group | Study Outcome | Results: differences between experimental and control group | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Type of AOT | Videos (perspectives) | Type of intervention | |||
Buccino G. et al.; 2018 [20] | 15 videos of task of daily action subdivided in ¾ motor segments | Different perspectives | Videos with no specific motor content + execution of same actions at the EG | MUUL, AHA | After treatment, the functional score gain was significantly different in the EG and CG |
Fu J et al.; 2017 [21] | Observation (10 min) + imitating (10 min) Actions: Many different movements in different directions with different complexity | Each action was filmed from 2 different angles | Observe videos of different geometric patterns and symbols + performed action as the EG | FMA, WMFT, MBI, MEP | FMA, WMFT, MBI increased significantly compared with that before therapy in both groups. The indexes were significantly higher in the EG group compare to the CG |
Kirkpatrick E et al.; 2016 [22] | watch a parent perform a movement + execution | (no video) egocentric viewpoint | Purposeful action observation program (without the observation) | AHA, MA2, ABILHAND-Kids | no between-group differences in AHA, MA2, or ABILHAND-Kids at 3 and 6 months vs baseline |
Kim CH et al.; 2016 [23] | Observation (9 min), followed by a break (1 min to organize + practicing (30 min) Actions: Task-oriented training consisted of performing task based on ADLs | Each video provided 3 views simultaneously: front, side and top | The same tasks during a 30 min period, without watching the video | FMA, BBT, MBI, MAS | The mean change of FMA, BBT, and MBI in the AOT was significantly different between groups. No differences at MAS |
Zhu M-H et al.; 2015 [1] | Observation followed by the action Actions: total of 30 actions showing many different movements or more complex actions | Straight on (20s), right above (15 s) and right inside (15 s) | Routine rehabilitation treatment and nursing | FMA, MBI, MAS | FMA, BI and MAS scores were significantly better after treatment in the EG compared to the CG |
Kim E et al.; 2015 [24] | Observation of 2 from a variety of activities per session selected by patients, repeated over 1 week | n.s. | Perform the purposeful AO program without observing actions | WMFT | The EG showed significantly greater improvement compared with the CG |
Kim E et al.; 2015 [25] | Observation of 2 daily life activities per session selected by patients repeated over 1 week | n.s. | Perform the AOT assignments, without the observational part | 3D motion analysis system | EG showed improvement than the CG (no significant). Both groups showed improvements in average velocity, trajectory ratio, and movement degree, but not statistically significant |
Sale P et al.;2014 [26] | Observation followed by performing the same tasks (2 min) from the easiest to the most complex action Actions: 20 daily activities composed by 3 different meaningful motor sequences displayed in order of ascending difficulty | first-person | Control Treatment: 5 static images displaying objects, without any animal or human being, for 3 min + to perform the same tasks of the EG | BBT, FMA | Significant higher gain for EG than CG, with respect to functional measures taken at T1 and T2. Left hemiparetic subjects achieved significantly greater benefits compared to the right ones. FMA and BBT between groups, statistically significant differences only for left hemiparetic. |
Sgandurra G et al.; 2013 [5] | 15 sets of daily life, un- or bi-manual goal-related actions of increasing complexity | First-person perspective | To watch computer games + verbally instructions to perform same actions as AOT group | AHA, MUUL, ABILHAND-Kids | Significant AHA within-group differences at all follow-up assessments. At T1 significant between-group difference and at T2 and T3 at the limits of significance. No differences at MUUL and ABILHAND-Kids |
Lee D et al.; 2013 [27] | AOT group: observation of task video of drinking behaviour (5 min) followed by the actions (5 min) | From the front of the model | Observation group: observation of a task video (20 times); APG: repeatedly practiced actions performed during the preliminary test for 10 min; CG: neither watched the video nor practiced the actions | Number of times the full drinking action was performed in 1 min | All groups showed statistically significant improvements compared to CG. Combined group had a significant higher number of drinking behaviors than Observation group, immediately after and 1 week after the experiment. No statistical differences between the Combined and the AOT group |
Cowles T et al.; 2013 [28] | Observation (1–2 min) followed by action (4–6 min) performed simultaneously with the therapist | No video | CPT as deemed appropriate | MI, ARAT | The median (95% CI) between-group difference was not statistically significant |
Buccino G et al.;2012 [3] | motor tasks of actions related to the children’s daily lives | Different perspectives | Video (no specific motor content) + execution of same actions as the EG | MUUL | After treatment, the functional score gain was significantly different in the EG and CG |
Franceschini M. et al.;2012 [29] | Observation of 1 task per day consisting in three different 3-min meaningful motor sequences, from the easiest to the most complex action + to imitate the observed motor sequence. The actions were 20 daily activities | first-person | Control treatment or “sham” AO = to observe for 5 min 5 static images (no motor content) + to perform UL movements as well as feasible for 2 min according to a standard sequence, simulating those performed by the EG | BBT, FAT, FMA, MAS, FIMM | Differences between the 2 groups were found from T0 to T1 and from T1 to T2. However, no difference was found on either change in BBT performance from T1 to T2. No significant difference between the study groups was found in the FIMM and FMA performance |
Ertelt D. et al.; 2007 [6] | 6 min videos showing daily life hand/upper limb actions + 6 min of repetitive practice of the observed actions with their paretic UL. 3 hand/upper limb movements of increasing complexity each day | 3 different perspectives | Same as the EG but sequences of geometric symbols and letters. The practiced hand and upper limb actions were performed by instruction of the therapist in the exact order as they were practiced in the experimental condition | FAT, WMFT, SIS | Significant improvement of motor functions as compared to T0, and compared with CG, maintained for at least 8 weeks after the end of the intervention. Neural activations between EG and CG after training shows significant rise in bilateral ventral premotor cortex, bilateral superior temporal gyrus and supplementary motor area |