Motor learning

An increased amount of practice is related to improved capabilities; however, the process of optimal learning is not clear-cut so the amount, type, dose and frequency must be individualised depending on learning capabilities (Brody & Hall, 2011; Muratori, Lamberg, Quinn, & Duff, 2013).

Type of practice?

• Part-practice versus whole practice: Learning can be completed in part-practice or whole practice of a skill. Determining whole versus part practice is dependent on the analysis of the number of segments and degrees which those segments are dependent on one another. For example, in continuous tasks one part of the skill is dependent on completion of the following, whole practice may be beneficial. Whereas if sequences of movements are coupled to complete a task, for example reaching and then lifting a bottle to drink, part practice may be beneficial.

• Mental practice: Mental practice involves the process of cognitive rehearsal of a motor skill, without any physical movement, which is hypothesized to improve a skill secondary to the activation of neural process required for the actual physical performance (Roth et al., 1996). When mental practice and physical practice are combined, superior outcomes are noted (Muratori, Lamberg, Quinn, & Duff, 2013).

• Specificity of practice: focuses on the functional deficits that are demonstrated and tasks which are meaningful for the patient however, manipulation of the type, schedule and amount of practice must be manipulated to promote long-term learning.

Dose?

• Massed vs distributed practice: should all repetitions be completed at once with minimal rest (massed), or separated into smaller, manageable chunks (distributed). Again, no method has been shown to be more beneficial, so each individual should be managed personally depending on strength, endurance, learning capabilities, attention span and cognition.