Writing with the non-dominant hand provides cognitive benefits
the verdict
INSUFFICIENT LEANING
refutedsupported
the weight of evidence
2 sources for · 0 against
Selected studies partially cover non-dominant hand or arm motor tasks demonstrating neural connectivity or dexterity acquisition involving cognitive control, but evidence directly addressing cognitive benefits specifically from writing with the non-dominant hand is absent.
Background The left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) is involved in early-phase manual dexterity skill acquisition when cognitive control processes, such as integration and complexity demands, are required. However, the effectiveness of left DLPFC transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on early-phase motor learning and whether its effectiveness depends on the cognitive demand of the target task are unclear. This study aimed to investigate whether tDCS over the left DLPFC improves non-dominant hand dexterity performance and determine if its efficacy depends on the cognitive demand of the target task. Methods In this randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial, 70 healthy, right-handed, young adult participants were recruited. They were randomly allocated to the active tDCS (2 mA for 20 min) or sham groups and repeatedly performed the Purdue Pegboard Test (PPT) left-handed peg task and left-handed assembly task three times: pre-tDCS, during tDCS, and post tDCS. Results The final sample comprised 66 healthy young adults (mean age, 22.73 ± 1.57 years). There were significant interactions between group and time in both PPT tasks, indicating significantly higher performance of those in the active tDCS group than those in the sham group post tDCS (p < 0.001). Moreover, a greater benefit was observed in the left-handed assembly task performance than in the peg task performance (p < 0.001). No significant correlation between baseline performance and benefits from tDCS was observed in either task. Conclusions These results demonstrated that prefrontal tDCS significantly improved early-phase manual dexterity skill acquisition, and its benefits were greater for the task with high cognitive demands. These findings contribute to a deeper understanding of the underlying neurophysiological mechanisms of the left DLPFC in the modulation of early-phase dexterity skill acquisition. Trial registration : This study was registered in the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trial Registry in Japan (UMIN000046868), Registered February 8, 2022 https://center6.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000053467
Introduction: Stroke is a leading cause of long-term disability and can result in cognitive and motor impairments. Exercise may improve cognition and motor function after stroke, but past research has typically targeted these impairments in isolation. Here, we investigated whether pairing multiple bouts of exercise with motor practice can positively affect both cognitive and motor function after stroke. Methods: Thirty-three individuals with chronic stroke and 41 healthy older adults completed 5 separate days of motor task practice using their paretic/non-dominant arm, paired with 23 minutes of either high-intensity interval training exercise or rest. Cognitive and motor function were tested pre- and post-intervention. Processing speed, visuospatial skills, and inhibitory control was tested with the Trail Making Test-A and B (TMT-A, TMT-B) and object hit and avoid. Total completion time from TMT-A and TMT-B, target and distractor hits from object hit and avoid were used as dependent measures for assessing cognitive function. For individuals with stroke, motor impairment and function were tested with the Fugl-Meyer upper extremity arm assessment and Wolf Motor Function Test respectively. Results: All participants showed evidence of motor learning; exercise did not confer an additional benefit beyond that stimulated by practice for either group. For stroke participants, motor function (p = .047), but not motor impairment, improved over time. The stroke group who exercised before motor practice displayed significant reductions in TMT-A completion time (p = .035). Both stroke and older adults hit more targets in the post- compared to pre-intervention (p < .001), driven by improvements in the affected/non-dominant hand. Importantly, exercise paired with motor practice also led to a reduced number of distractors hit (p = .026) in the object hit and avoid task for both individuals with stroke and older adults. These changes were not at the expense of speed. Discussion: Five days of high-intensity interval training exercise paired with motor practice led to improved processing speed as measured by the TMT-A for individuals with stroke. Both exercise participant groups (stroke and older adults) showed improved visuospatial skills and inhibitory control as measured by object hit and avoid following our intervention. Our findings suggest that exercise paired with motor task practice leads to improved cognitive-motor function in individuals with stroke and older adults. Together, exercise paired with skilled motor practice appears to be a safe and effective means of enhancing cognitive-motor skills after stroke and in older adults.
Everything we examined (2)
This check searched the claim as stated. It did not run a separate search for evidence against it.