The authors examined whether feedforward video self-modeling (FF VSM) would improve control over the affected limb, movement self-confidence, movement self-consciousness, and well-being in 18 stroke survivors. Participants completed a cup transport task and 2 questionnaires related to psychological processes pre- and postintervention. Pretest video footage of the unaffected limb performing the task was edited to create a best-of or mirror-reversed training DVD, creating the illusion that patients were performing proficiently with the affected limb. The training yielded significant improvements for the forward movement of the affected limb compared to the unaffected limb. Significant improvements were also seen in movement self-confidence, movement self-consciousness, and well-being. FF VSM appears to be a viable way to improve motor ability in populations with movement disorders.

The objective of the current study was to determine the test-retest reliability of heel-to-toe progression measures in the stance phase of gait using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) analysis. It has been proposed that heel-to-toe progression could be used as a functional measure of ankle muscle contracture/weakness in clinical populations. This was the first study to investigate the test-retest reliability of this measure. Eighteen healthy subjects walked over the GAITRite® mat three times at a comfortable speed on two sessions (≥ 48 hours apart). The reliability of the heel-to-toe progression measures; heel-contact time, mid-stance time and propulsive time were assessed. Also assessed were basic temporal-spatial parameters; velocity, cadence, stride length, step length, stride width, single and double leg support time. Reliability was determined using the ICC(3,1) model and, fixed and proportional biases, and measures of variability were assessed. Basic gait temporal-spatial parameters were not different between sessions (p > 0.05) and had excellent reliability (ICC(3,1) range: 0.871–0.953) indicating that subjects walked similarly between sessions. Measurement of heel-to-toe progression variables were not different between sessions (p > 0.05) and had excellent reliability (ICC(3,1) range: 0.845–0.926). However, these were less precise and more variable than the measurement of standard temporal-spatial gait variables. As the current study was performed on healthy populations, it represents the ‘best case’ scenario. The increased variability and reduced precision of heel-to-toe progression measurements should be considered if being used in clinical populations.

Blood flow restriction walking (BFR-W) is becoming more frequently used in aerobic and strength training and it has been proposed that BFR-W can be used in clinical populations. BFR-W may change gait stability yet few studies have assessed gait changes during or following BFR-W. The aim of this study was to assess if spatial-temporal gait parameters change during and following BFR-W. Twenty-four participants completed two walking sessions (>48-hours apart); 1) Unilateral BFR-W applied at the dominant thigh, 2) walking without BFR. In each session participants performed a 5-min warmup, 15-min walking intervention and 10-min active recovery. The warmup and active recovery were performed without BFR on both days. Measurements were attained at baseline, during the intervention and post-intervention using the GAITRite®. Linear mixed models were applied to each measured variable. Fixed factors were timepoint (warmup, intervention, and active recovery), condition (BFR-W and control walking) and condition × timepoint. Random factors were subject and subject × condition. Participants took shorter (3.2-cm (mean difference), CI95%: 0.8–5.6-cm) and wider strides (1.4-cm, CI95%: 0.9–1.9-cm) during BFR-W. For single leg measures, participants took shorter steps (2.8-cm, CI95%: 1.7–4.0-cm) with a faster single support time (7.5-ms, CI95%: 2.9–12.0-ms) on the non-dominant (unoccluded) leg during BFR-W compared to the non-dominant leg during control walking. There were no differences in step length and single support time between the dominant (occluded) leg during BFR-W compared to the dominant leg during control walking. There were no significant changes in velocity, cadence or double support time between BFR-W and control walking (P > 0.05). BFR-W caused small transient changes to several gait parameters. These changes should be considered when using BFR-W in clinical populations.