Bimanual coordination with three hands: is the mirror hand of any help?

Through the looking-glass: Mirror feedback modulates temporal and spatial aspects of bimanual coordination

Mirror therapy has become an effective and recommended intervention for a range of conditions affecting the upper limb (e.g. hemiparesis following stroke). However, little is known about how mirror feedback affects the control of bimanual movements (as performed during mirror therapy). In this study, in preparation for future clinical investigations, we examined the kinematics of bimanual circle drawing in unimpaired participants both with (Experiment 1) and without (Experiment 2) a visual template to guide movement. In both experiments, 15 unimpaired right-handed participants performed self-paced continuous bimanual circle-drawing movements with a mirror/symmetrical coordination pattern. For the mirror condition, vision was directed towards the mirror in order to monitor the reflected limb. In the no mirror condition, the direction of vision was unchanged, but the mirror was replaced with an opaque screen. Movements of both hands were recorded using motion capture apparatus. In both experiments, the most striking feature of movements was that the hand behind the mirror drifted spatially during the course of individual trials. Participants appeared to be largely unaware of this marked positional change of their unseen hand, which was most pronounced when a template to guide movement was visible (Experiment 1). Temporal asynchrony between the limbs was also affected by mirror feedback in both experiments; in the mirror condition, illusory vision of the unseen hand led to a relative phase lead for that limb. Our data highlight the remarkable impact that the introduction of a simple mirror can have on bimanual coordination. Modulation of spatial and temporal features is consistent with the mirror inducing a rapid and powerful visual illusion, the latter appearing to override proprioceptive signals.

Vision-Driven Kinesthetic Illusion in Mirror Visual Feedback

In the paradigm of mirror visual feedback, it remains unclear how images of the mirrored hand directly affect the sense of motion of the hidden hand (kinesthetic illusion). To examine this question, we created an original mirror visual feedback setup using a horizontal mechanism of motion for the mirror and the hidden hand, each of which could independently be given a specific velocity. It should be noted that this setup can cause the hand viewed in the mirror to move without the involvement of the visible hand. In the experiment, the participants reported the felt direction of the hidden hand's displacement (left/right) after 4 s dual movements with quasi-randomized velocities. It was found that the subjective direction of motion of the hidden hand was strongly biased toward the direction of the mirror. Further, anatomical congruency was found to affect kinesthetic illusion for cases where the mirror approaches the visible hand.

Body Schema Illusions: A Study of the Link between the Rubber Hand and Kinesthetic Mirror Illusions through Individual Differences

Background

The well-known rubber hand paradigm induces an illusion by having participants feel the touch applied to a fake hand. In parallel, the kinesthetic mirror illusion elicits illusions of movement by moving the reflection of a participant's arm. Experimental manipulation of sensory inputs leads to emergence of these multisensory illusions. There are strong conceptual similarities between these two illusions, suggesting that they rely on the same neurophysiological mechanisms, but this relationship has never been investigated. Studies indicate that participants differ in their sensitivity to these illusions, which provides a possibility for studying the relationship between these two illusions.

Method

We tested 36 healthy participants to confirm that there exist reliable individual differences in sensitivity to the two illusions and that participants sensitive to one illusion are also sensitive to the other.

Results

The results revealed that illusion sensitivity was very stable across trials and that individual differences in sensitivity to the kinesthetic mirror illusion were highly related to individual differences in sensitivity to the rubber hand illusion.

Conclusions

Overall, these results support the idea that these two illusions may be both linked to a transitory modification of body schema, wherein the most sensitive people have the most malleable body schema.

Sensory Disturbances, but Not Motor Disturbances, Induced by Sensorimotor Conflicts Are Increased in the Presence of Acute Pain

Incongruence between our motor intention and the sensory feedback of the action (sensorimotor conflict) induces abnormalities in sensory perception in various chronic pain populations, and to a lesser extent in pain-free individuals. The aim of this study was to simultaneously investigate sensory and motor disturbances evoked by sensorimotor conflicts, as well as to assess how they are influenced by the presence of acute pain. It was hypothesized that both sensory and motor disturbances would be increased in presence of pain, which would suggest that pain makes body representations less robust. Thirty healthy participants realized cyclic asymmetric movements of flexion-extension with both upper limbs in a robotized system combined to a 2D virtual environment. The virtual environment provided a visual feedback (VF) about movements that was either congruent or incongruent, while the robotized system precisely measured motor performance (characterized by bilateral amplitude asymmetry and medio-lateral drift). Changes in sensory perception were assessed with a questionnaire after each trial. The effect of pain (induced with capsaicin) was compared to three control conditions (no somatosensory stimulation, tactile distraction and proprioceptive masking). Results showed that while both sensory and motor disturbances were induced by sensorimotor conflicts, only sensory disturbances were enhanced during pain condition comparatively to the three control conditions. This increase did not statistically differ across VF conditions (congruent or incongruent). Interestingly however, the types of sensations evoked by the conflict in the presence of pain (changes in intensity of pain or discomfort, changes in temperature or impression of a missing limb) were different than those evoked by the conflict alone (loss of control, peculiarity and the perception of having an extra limb). Finally, results showed no relationship between the amount of motor and sensory disturbances evoked in a given individual. Contrary to what was hypothesized, acute pain does not appear to make people more sensitive to the conflict itself, but rather impacts on the type and amount of sensory disturbances that they experienced in response to that conflict. Moreover, the results suggest that some sensorimotor integration processes remain intact in presence of acute pain, allowing us to maintain adaptive motor behavior.

Anchoring the "floating arm": Use of proprioceptive and mirror visual feedback from one arm to control involuntary displacement of the other arm

Arm movement control takes advantage of multiple inputs, including those originating from the contralateral arm. In the mirror paradigm, it has been suggested that control of the unseen arm, hidden by the mirror, is facilitated by the reflection of the other, moving arm. Although proprioceptive feedback originating from the moving arm, (the image of which is reflected in the mirror), is always coupled with visual feedback in the mirror paradigm, the former has received little attention. We recently showed that the involuntary arm movement following a sustained, isometric contraction, known as the "floating arm" or "Kohnstamm phenomenon", was adjusted to the passive-motorized displacement of the other arm. However, provision of mirror feedback, that is, the reflection in the mirror of the passively moved arm, did not add to this coupling effect. Therefore, the interlimb coupling in the mirror paradigm may to a large extent have a proprioceptive origin rather than a visual origin. The objective of the present study was to decouple mirror feedback and proprioceptive feedback from the reflected, moving arm and evaluate their respective contributions to interlimb coupling in the mirror paradigm. First (in Experiment 1, under eyes-closed conditions), we found that masking the proprioceptive afferents of the passively moved arm (by co-vibrating the antagonistic biceps and triceps muscles) suppressed the interlimb coupling between involuntary displacement of one arm and passive displacement of the other. Next (in Experiment 2), we masked proprioceptive afferents of the passively moved arm and specifically evaluated mirror feedback. We found that interlimb coupling through mirror feedback (though significant) was weaker than interlimb coupling through proprioceptive feedback. Overall, the present results show that in the mirror paradigm, proprioceptive feedback is stronger and more consistent than visual-mirror feedback in terms of the impact on interlimb coupling.

Brain Regions Associated to a Kinesthetic Illusion Evoked by Watching a Video of One's Own Moving Hand

It is well known that kinesthetic illusions can be induced by stimulation of several sensory systems (proprioception, touch, vision…). In this study we investigated the cerebral network underlying a kinesthetic illusion induced by visual stimulation by using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) in humans. Participants were instructed to keep their hand still while watching the video of their own moving hand (Self Hand) or that of someone else's moving hand (Other Hand). In the Self Hand condition they experienced an illusory sensation that their hand was moving whereas the Other Hand condition did not induce any kinesthetic illusion. The contrast between the Self Hand and Other Hand conditions showed significant activation in the left dorsal and ventral premotor cortices, in the left Superior and Inferior Parietal lobules, at the right Occipito-Temporal junction as well as in bilateral Insula and Putamen. Most strikingly, there was no activation in the primary motor and somatosensory cortices, whilst previous studies have reported significant activation in these regions for vibration-induced kinesthetic illusions. To our knowledge, this is the first study that indicates that humans can experience kinesthetic perception without activation in the primary motor and somatosensory areas. We conclude that under some conditions watching a video of one's own moving hand could lead to activation of a network that is usually involved in processing copies of efference, thus leading to the illusory perception that the real hand is indeed moving.

The role of tactile afference in shaping motor behaviour and implications for prosthetic innovation

The present review focusses on how tactile somatosensory afference is encoded and processed, and how this information is interpreted and acted upon in terms of motor control. We relate the fundamental workings of the sensorimotor system to the rehabilitation of amputees using modern prosthetic interventions. Our sense of touch is central to our everyday lives, from allowing us to manipulate objects accurately to giving us a sense of self-embodiment. There are a variety of specialised cutaneous mechanoreceptive afferents, which differ in terms of type and density according to the skin site. In humans, there is a dense innervation of our hands, which is reflected in their vast over-representation in somatosensory and motor cortical areas. We review the accumulated evidence from animal and human studies about the precise interplay between the somatosensory and motor systems, which is highly integrated in many brain areas and often not separable. The glabrous hand skin provides exquisite, discriminative detail about touch, which is useful for refining movements. When these signals are disrupted, such as through injury or amputation, the consequences are considerable. The development of sensory feedback in prosthetics offers a promising avenue for the full integration of a missing body part. Real-time touch feedback from motor intentions aids in grip control and the ability to distinguish different surfaces, even introducing the possibility of pleasure in artificial touch. Thus, our knowledge from fundamental research into sensorimotor interactions should be used to develop more realistic and integrative prostheses.

Passive or simulated displacement of one arm (but not its mirror reflection) modulates the involuntary motor behavior of the other arm

Recent studies of both healthy and patient populations have cast doubt on the mirror paradigm's beneficial effect on motor behavior. Indeed, the voluntary arm displacement that accompanies reflection in the mirror may be the determining factor in terms of the motor behavior of the contralateral arm. The objective of the present study was to assess the respective effects of mirror reflection and arm displacement (whether real or simulated) on involuntary motor behavior of the contralateral arm following sustained, isometric contraction (Kohnstamm phenomenon). Our results revealed that (i) passive displacement of one arm (displacement of the left arm via a motorized manipulandum moving at 4°/s) influenced the velocity of the Kohnstamm phenomenon (forearm flexion occurring shortly after the cessation of muscle contraction) in the contralateral arm and (ii) mirror vision had no effect. Indeed, the velocity of the Kohnstamm phenomenon tended to be adjusted to match the velocity of the passive displacement of the other arm. In a second experiment, arm displacement was simulated by vibrating the triceps at 25, 50 or 75 Hz. Results showed that the velocity of the Kohnstamm phenomenon in one arm increased with the vibration frequency applied to the other arm. Our results revealed the occurrence of bimanual coupling because involuntary displacement of one arm was regulated by muscle-related information generated by the actual or simulated displacement of the other arm. In line with the literature data on voluntary motor behavior, our study failed to evidence an additional impact of mirror vision on involuntary motor behavior.