Home > Journals > European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine > Past Issues > European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine 2009 June;45(2) > European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine 2009 June;45(2):209-14

CURRENT ISSUE
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Reprints

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL AND REHABILITATION MEDICINE

A Journal on Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation after Pathological Events


Official Journal of the Italian Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (SIMFER), European Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (ESPRM), European Union of Medical Specialists - Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine Section (UEMS-PRM), Mediterranean Forum of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (MFPRM), Hellenic Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (EEFIAP)
In association with International Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (ISPRM)
Indexed/Abstracted in: CINAHL, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 2,063


eTOC

 

REHABILITATION IN PARKINSON’S DISEASE: PALLIATIVE CARE OR EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE?  


European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine 2009 June;45(2):209-14

language: English

The rationale for motor learning in Parkinson’s disease

Abbruzzese G., Trompetto C., Marinelli L.

Department of Neurosciences Ophthalmology and Genetics University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy


FULL TEXT  


Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a chronic progressive disorder mainly affecting the motor system. PD is only partially controlled by symptomatic dopaminergic treatment. Therefore, motor rehabilitation can be used in PD to reduce complications and to train patients in the use of compensatory movement strategies. Rehabilitative practice is largely dependent on the efficiency of motor learning, i.e. the acquisition of new abilities or the adaptation of pre-existing ones. Although patients with PD are able to improve their motor performance through practice, the amount and persistence of clinical benefit are uncertain. Both “implicit” (procedural) and “explicit” (declarative) features of motor learning have been extensively investigated in patients with PD using neuropsychological testing, serial reaction time paradigms, and analysis of reaching movements. Evidence from these studies suggests an early impairment of “explicit” learning in PD, while “implicit” learning is relatively preserved. The consolidation of learned motor tasks is defective in PD and the mechanisms of motor learning seem to be independent from dopamine-replacement therapy. The knowledge of motor learning in PD is critical in designing more effective rehabilitative protocols.

top of page

Publication History

Cite this article as

Corresponding author e-mail