Perceived versus actual head-on-trunk orientation during arm movement control

Using Neck Muscle Afferentation to Control an Ongoing Limb Movement? Individual Differences in the Influence of Brief Neck Vibration

When preparing and executing goal-directed actions, neck proprioceptive information is critical to determining the relative positions of the body and target in space. While the contribution of neck proprioception for upper-limb movements has been previously investigated, we could not find evidence discerning its impact on the planning vs. online control of upper-limb trajectories. To investigate these distinct sensorimotor processes, participants performed discrete reaches towards a virtual target. On some trials, neck vibration was randomly applied before and/or during the movement, or not at all. The main dependent variable was the medio-lateral/directional bias of the reaching finger. The neck vibration conditions induced early leftward trajectory biases in some participants and late rightward trajectory biases in others. These different patterns of trajectory biases were explained by individual differences in the use of body-centered and head-centered frames of reference. Importantly, the current study provides direct evidence that sensory cues from the neck muscles contribute to the online control of goal-directed arm movements, likely accompanied by significant individual differences.

Does My Neck Make Me Clumsy? A Systematic Review of Clinical and Neurophysiological Studies in Humans

Introduction: Clumsiness has been described as a symptom associated with neck pain and injury. However, the actuality of this symptom in clinical practice is unclear. The aim of this investigation was to collect definitions and frequency of reports of clumsiness in clinical studies of neck pain/injury, identify objective measures of clumsiness and investigate the association between the neck and objective measures of clumsiness.

Methods: Six electronic databases were systematically searched, records identified and assessed including a risk of bias. Heterogeneity in designs of studies prevented pooling of data, so qualitative analysis was undertaken.

Results: Eighteen studies were retrieved and assessed; the overall quality of evidence was moderate to high. Eight were prospective cross-sectional studies comparing upper limb sensorimotor task performance and ten were case series involving a healthy cohort only. Clumsiness was defined as a deficit in coordination or impairment of upper limb kinesthesia. All but one of 18 studies found a deterioration in performing upper limb kinesthetic tasks including a healthy cohort where participants were exposed to a natural neck intervention that required the neck to function toward extreme limits.

Conclusion: Alterations in neck sensory input occurring as a result of requiring the neck to operate near the end of its functional range in healthy people and in patients with neck pain/injury are associated with reductions in acuity of upper limb kinesthetic sense and deterioration in sensorimotor performance. Understanding the association between the neck and decreased accuracy of upper limb kinesthetic tasks provide pathways for treatment and rehabilitation strategies in managing clumsiness.

The internal representation of head orientation differs for conscious perception and balance control

KEY POINTS

We tested perceived head-on-feet orientation and the direction of vestibular-evoked balance responses in passively and actively held head-turned postures. The direction of vestibular-evoked balance responses was not aligned with perceived head-on-feet orientation while maintaining prolonged passively held head-turned postures. Furthermore, static visual cues of head-on-feet orientation did not update the estimate of head posture for the balance controller. A prolonged actively held head-turned posture did not elicit a rotation in the direction of the vestibular-evoked balance response despite a significant rotation in perceived angular head posture. It is proposed that conscious perception of head posture and the transformation of vestibular signals for standing balance relying on this head posture are not dependent on the same internal representation. Rather, the balance system may operate under its own sensorimotor principles, which are partly independent from perception.

ABSTRACT

Vestibular signals used for balance control must be integrated with other sensorimotor cues to allow transformation of descending signals according to an internal representation of body configuration. We explored two alternative models of sensorimotor integration that propose (1) a single internal representation of head-on-feet orientation is responsible for perceived postural orientation and standing balance or (2) conscious perception and balance control are driven by separate internal representations. During three experiments, participants stood quietly while passively or actively maintaining a prolonged head-turned posture (>10 min). Throughout the trials, participants intermittently reported their perceived head angular position, and subsequently electrical vestibular stimuli were delivered to elicit whole-body balance responses. Visual recalibration of head-on-feet posture was used to determine whether static visual cues are used to update the internal representation of body configuration for perceived orientation and standing balance. All three experiments involved situations in which the vestibular-evoked balance response was not orthogonal to perceived head-on-feet orientation, regardless of the visual information provided. For prolonged head-turned postures, balance responses consistent with actual head-on-feet posture occurred only during the active condition. Our results indicate that conscious perception of head-on-feet posture and vestibular control of balance do not rely on the same internal representation, but instead treat sensorimotor cues in parallel and may arrive at different conclusions regarding head-on-feet posture. The balance system appears to bypass static visual cues of postural orientation and mainly use other sensorimotor signals of head-on-feet position to transform vestibular signals of head motion, a mechanism appropriate for most daily activities.

Postural reorientation does not cause the locomotor after-effect following rotary locomotion

After a period of stepping on a rotating platform, blindfolded subjects demonstrate a tendency to unconsciously turn when stepping in place, an after-effect known as podokinetic after-rotation (PKAR). Recent studies have also reported a change in postural orientation following the adaptive period and have suggested that this is causally related to PKAR. Here, we assess changes in trunk orientation following platform adaptation and determine their relationship to PKAR. Specifically, we determine whether a reorganized standing posture causes PKAR. Ten subjects stepped on a platform rotating at 60°/s for 10 min, with a cadence of 100 steps/min. Following adaptation, a significant PKAR response was seen, with a mean yaw rotation velocity of 6.0 ± 2.2°/s. In addition to this dynamic after-effect, there was a significant twist of the trunk with respect to the feet when standing still (6.9° ± 4.5°; mean ± SD), confirming the presence of a postural reorientation after-effect. However, the magnitudes of the two after-effects did not correlate (r = 0.06, p = 0.87). Furthermore, in a second experiment, a prolonged passive twist of the trunk was used to induce postural reorientation. However, in this case, PKAR was not induced. These results demonstrate that PKAR is not an automatic consequence of reorganized standing posture.

Influence of head orientation on visually and memory-guided arm movements

In the absence of visual supervision, tilting the head sideways gives rise to deviations in spatially defined arm movements. The purpose of this study was to determine whether these deviations are restricted to situations with impoverished visual information. Two experiments were conducted in which participants were positioned supine and reproduced with their unseen index finger a 2 dimensional figure either under visual supervision or from memory (eyes closed). In the former condition, the figure remained visible (using a mirror). In the latter condition, the figure was first observed and then reproduced from memory. Participants' head was either aligned with the trunk or tilted 30° towards the left or right shoulder. In experiment 1, participants observed first the figure with the head straight and then reproduced it with the head either aligned or tilted sideways. In Experiment 2, participants observed the figure with the head in the position in which the figure was later reproduced. Results of Experiment 1 and 2 showed deviations of the motor reproduction in the direction opposite to the head in both the memory and visually-guided conditions. However, the deviations decreased significantly under visual supervision when the head was tilted left. In Experiment 1, the perceptual visual bias induced by head tilt was evaluated. Participants were required to align the figure parallel to their median trunk axis. Results revealed that the figure was perceived as parallel with the trunk when it was actually tilted in the direction of the head. Perceptual and motor responses did not correlate. Therefore, as long as visual feedback of the arm is prevented, an internal bias, likely originating from head/trunk representation, alters hand-motor production irrespectively of whether visual feedback of the figure is available or not.

Visual-shift adaptation is composed of separable sensory and task-dependent effects

Visuomotor coordination requires both the accurate alignment of spatial information from different sensory streams and the ability to convert these sensory signals into accurate motor commands. Both of these processes are highly plastic, as illustrated by the rapid adaptation of goal-directed movements following exposure to shifted visual feedback. Although visual-shift adaptation is a widely used model of sensorimotor learning, the multifaceted adaptive response is typically poorly quantified. We present an approach to quantitatively characterizing both sensory and task-dependent components of adaptation. Sensory aftereffects are quantified with "alignment tests" that provide a localized, two-dimensional measure of sensory recalibration. These sensory effects obey a precise form of "additivity," in which the shift in sensory alignment between vision and the right hand is equal to the vector sum of the shifts between vision and the left hand and between the right and left hands. This additivity holds at the exposure location and at a second generalization location. These results support a component transformation model of sensory coordination, in which eye-hand and hand-hand alignment relies on a sequence of shared sensory transformations. We also ask how these sensory effects compare with the aftereffects measured in target reaching and tracking tasks. We find that the aftereffect depends on both the task performed during feedback-shift exposure and on the testing task. The results suggest the presence of both a general sensory recalibration and task-dependent sensorimotor effect. The task-dependent effect is observed in highly stereotyped reaching movements, but not in the more variable tracking task.