The early release of planned movement by acoustic startle can be delayed by transcranial magnetic stimulation over the motor cortex

Word Repetition Paired With Startling Stimuli Decreases Aphasia and Apraxia Severity in Severe-to-Moderate Stroke: A Stratified, Single-Blind, Randomized, Phase 1 Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

This prospective, single-blinded, parallel, stratified, randomized clinical trial via telehealth aimed to investigate the impact of Startle Adjuvant Rehabilitation Therapy (START) on aphasia, apraxia of speech (AOS), and quality of life in individuals with chronic stroke. The study hypothesized that START would have a greater effect on AOS-related measures and more severe individuals.

METHOD

Forty-two participants with poststroke aphasia, AOS, or both were randomly assigned to the START or control group. Both groups received 77-dB GET READY and GO cues during a word repetition task for three 1-hr sessions on consecutive days. The START group additionally received 105-dB white noise GO cues during one third of trials. The Western Aphasia Battery-Revised, Apraxia Battery for Adults, Stroke Impact Scale, and Communication Outcomes After Stroke scale were administered at Day 1, Day 5, and 1-month follow-up.

RESULTS

START improved performance on some subtests of the Western Aphasia Battery (Comprehension, Repetition, Reading) and measures of AOS (Diadochokinetic Rate, Increasing Word Length) in individuals with moderate/severe aphasia, whereas moderate/severe controls saw no changes. Individuals with mild aphasia receiving START had improved Reading, whereas mild controls saw improved Comprehension. The START group had increased mood and perceived communication recovery by Day 5, whereas controls saw no changes in quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first to evaluate the impact of training with startling acoustic stimuli on clinical measures of aphasia and AOS. Our findings suggest START can enhance both nontrained speech production and receptive speech tasks in moderate/severe aphasia, possibly by reducing poststroke cortical inhibition. Our findings should be considered carefully, as our limitations include small effect sizes, within-group variability, and low completion rates for quality-of-life assessments and follow-up visits. Future studies should explore a mechanism of action, conduct larger and longer Phase 2 clinical trials, and evaluate long-term retention.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.24093519.

A motor plan is accessible for voluntary initiation and involuntary triggering at similar short latencies

Movement goals are an essential component of motor planning, altering voluntary and involuntary motor actions. While there have been many studies of motor planning, it is unclear if motor goals influence voluntary and involuntary movements at similar latencies. The objectives of this study were to determine how long it takes to prepare a motor action and to compare this time for voluntary and involuntary movements. We hypothesized a prepared motor action would influence voluntarily and involuntarily initiated movements at the same latency. We trained subjects to reach with a forced reaction time paradigm and used a startling acoustic stimulus (SAS) to trigger involuntary initiation of the same reaches. The time available to prepare was controlled by varying when one of four reach targets was presented. Reach direction was used to evaluate accuracy. We quantified the time between target presentation and the cue or trigger for movement initiation. We found that reaches were accurately initiated when the target was presented 48 ms before the SAS and 162 ms before the cue to voluntarily initiate movement. While the SAS precisely controlled the latency of movement onset, voluntary reach onset was more variable. We, therefore, quantified the time between target presentation and movement onset and found no significant difference in the time required to plan reaches initiated voluntarily or involuntarily (∆ = 8 ms, p = 0.2). These results demonstrate that the time required to plan accurate reaches is similar regardless of if they are initiated voluntarily or triggered involuntarily. This finding may inform the understanding of neural pathways governing storage and access of motor plans.

Effect of Motor Task on Cortex Brainstem Modulation: Preliminary Results

Reticulospinal Tracts (RSTs) have divergent connections to multiple spinal segments that innervate many upper extremity muscles. Therefore, increased RST engagement can often lead to muscle coactivation across multiple limb joints. The RST originates from the reticular formation (RF) and receives projections from the cortex. This provides the anatomical basis for cortex-brainstem modulation. Currently, we know little about how cortex modulates the RF to control RST engagement during motor preparation for various motor tasks, such as tasks involving proximal and distal upper limb joint coordination vs. a purely distal task. We hypothesize that since a simultaneous arm lifting and hand opening task (LIFTOPEN) requires more selective muscle recruitment than a hand opening task (OPEN), the cortex will suppress the RF to reduce the RST engagement at distal muscles during LIFTOPEN. To test this hypothesis, we investigated the startReact response in thirteen able-bodied participants performing the OPEN and LIFTOPEN tasks in response to a startling and non-startling acoustic stimulation. Our results showed that activation of distal muscles was significantly decreased, and the startle response was delayed in LIFTOPEN compared to OPEN. Both results suggest that the cortex suppressed RF and reduced the RST engagement in LIFTOPEN compared to OPEN.Clinical Relevance- Our results provide foundational knowledge of the task-specific nature of cortex-brainstem modulation. This scientific finding provides a base to compare how a unilateral brain injury may affect this cortex-brainstem modulation.

Evolving changes in cortical and subcortical excitability during movement preparation: A study of brain potentials and eye-blink reflexes during loud acoustic stimulation

During preparation for action, the presentation of loud acoustic stimuli (LAS) can trigger movements at very short latencies in a phenomenon called the StartReact effect. It was initially proposed that a special, separate subcortical mechanism that bypasses slower cortical areas could be involved. We sought to examine the evidence for a separate mechanism against the alternative that responses to LAS can be explained by a combination of stimulus intensity effects and preparatory states. To investigate whether cortically mediated preparatory processes are involved in mediating reactions to LAS, we used an auditory reaction task where we manipulated the preparation level within each trial by altering the conditional probability of the imperative stimulus. We contrasted responses to non-intense tones and LAS and examined whether cortical activation and subcortical excitability and motor responses were influenced by preparation levels. Increases in preparation levels were marked by gradual reductions in reaction time (RT) coupled with increases in cortical activation and subcortical excitability - at both condition and trial levels. Interestingly, changes in cortical activation influenced motor and auditory but not visual areas - highlighting the widespread yet selective nature of preparation. RTs were shorter to LAS than tones, but the overall pattern of preparation level effects was the same for both stimuli. Collectively, the results demonstrate that LAS responses are indeed shaped by cortically mediated preparatory processes. The concurrent changes observed in brain and behavior with increasing preparation reinforce the notion that preparation is marked by evolving brain states which shape the motor system for action.

Startle-induced rapid release of a gait initiation sequence in Parkinson's disease with freezing of gait

OBJECTIVE

Freezing of gait (FOG) in Parkinson's disease (PD) is characterized by the inability to initiate stepping, despite the intention to do so. This study used a startling acoustic stimulus paradigm to examine if the capacity to select, prepare and initiate gait under simple and choice reaction time conditions are impaired in people with PD and FOG.

METHODS

Thirty individuals (10 PD with FOG, 10 PD without FOG, and 10 controls) performed an instructed-delay gait initiation task under simple and choice reaction time conditions. In a subset of trials, a startle stimulus (124 dB) was presented 500 ms before the time of the imperative go-cue. Anticipatory postural adjustments preceding and accompanying gait initiation were quantified.

RESULTS

The presentation of a startling acoustic stimulus resulted in the rapid initiation of an anticipatory postural adjustment sequence during both the simple and choice reaction time tasks in all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The neural capacity to prepare the spatial and temporal components of gait initiation remains intact in PD individuals with and without FOG.

SIGNIFICANCE

The retained capacity to prepare anticipatory postural adjustments in advance may explain why external sensory cues are effective in the facilitation of gait initiation in people with PD with FOG.

Impact of Startling Acoustic Stimuli on Word Repetition in Individuals With Aphasia and Apraxia of Speech Following Stroke

PURPOSE

The StartReact effect, whereby movements are elicited by loud, startling acoustic stimuli (SAS), allows the evaluation of movements when initiated through involuntary circuitry, before auditory feedback. When StartReact is applied during poststroke upper extremity movements, individuals exhibit increased muscle recruitment, reaction times, and reaching distances. StartReact releases unimpaired speech with similar increases in muscle recruitment and reaction time. However, as poststroke communication disorders have divergent neural circuitry from upper extremity tasks, it is unclear if StartReact will enhance speech poststroke. Our objective is to determine if (a) StartReact is present in individuals with poststroke aphasia and apraxia and (b) SAS exposure enhances speech intelligibility.

METHOD

We remotely delivered startling, 105-dB white noise bursts (SAS) and quiet, non-SAS cues to 15 individuals with poststroke aphasia and apraxia during repetition of six words. We evaluated average word intensity, pitch, pitch trajectories, vowel formants F1 and F2 (first and second formants), phonemic error rate, and percent incidence of each SAS versus non-SAS-elicited phoneme produced under each cue type.

RESULTS

For SAS trials compared to non-SAS, speech intensity increased (∆ + 0.6 dB), speech pitch increased (∆ + 22.7 Hz), and formants (F1 and F2) changed, resulting in a smaller vowel space after SAS. SAS affected pitch trajectories for some, but not all, words. Non-SAS trials had more stops (∆ + 4.7 utterances) while SAS trials had more sustained phonemes (fricatives, glides, affricates, liquids; ∆ + 5.4 utterances). SAS trials had fewer distortion errors but no change in substitution errors or overall error rate compared to non-SAS trials.

CONCLUSIONS

We show that stroke-impaired speech is susceptible to StartReact, evidenced by decreased intelligibility due to altered formants, pitch trajectories, and articulation, including increased incidence of sounds that could not be produced without SAS. Future studies should examine the impact of SAS on voluntary speech intelligibility and clinical measures of aphasia and apraxia.

Response triggering by an acoustic stimulus increases with stimulus intensity and is best predicted by startle reflex activation

In a simple reaction time task, the presentation of a startling acoustic stimulus has been shown to trigger the prepared response at short latency, known as the StartReact effect. However, it is unclear under what conditions it can be assumed that the loud stimulus results in response triggering. The purpose of the present study was to examine how auditory stimulus intensity and preparation level affect the probability of involuntary response triggering and the incidence of activation in the startle reflex indicator of sternocleidomastoid (SCM). In two reaction time experiments, participants were presented with an irrelevant auditory stimulus of varying intensities at various time points prior to the visual go-signal. Responses were independently categorized as responding to either the auditory or visual stimulus and those with or without SCM activation (i.e., SCM+/−). Both the incidence of response triggering and proportion of SCM+ trials increased with stimulus intensity and presentation closer to the go-signal. Data also showed that participants reacted to the auditory stimulus at a much higher rate on trials where the auditory stimulus elicited SCM activity versus those that did not, and a logistic regression analysis confirmed that SCM activation is a reliable predictor of response triggering for all conditions.

Anticipatory weight shift between arms when reaching from a crouched posture

Reaching movements performed from a crouched body posture require a shift of body weight from both arms to one arm. This situation has remained unexamined despite the analogous load requirements during step initiation and the many studies of reaching from a seated or standing posture. To determine whether the body weight shift involves anticipatory or exclusively reactive control, we obtained force plate records, hand kinematics, and arm muscle activity from 11 healthy right-handed participants. They performed reaching movements with their left and right arm in two speed contexts, "comfortable" and "as fast as possible," and two postural contexts, a less stable knees-together posture and a more stable knees-apart posture. Weight-shifts involved anticipatory postural actions (APAs) by the reaching and stance arms that were opposing in the vertical axis and aligned in the side-to-side axis similar to APAs by the legs for step initiation. Weight-shift APAs were correlated in time and magnitude, present in both speed contexts, more vigorous with the knees placed together, and similar when reaching with the dominant and nondominant arm. The initial weight-shift was preceded by bursts of muscle activity in the shoulder and elbow extensors (posterior deltoid and triceps lateral) of the reach arm and shoulder flexor (pectoralis major) of the stance arm, which indicates their causal role; leg muscles may have indirectly contributed but were not recorded. The strong functional similarity of weight-shift APAs during crouched reaching to human stepping and cat reaching suggests that they are a core feature of posture-movement coordination.NEW & NOTEWORTHY This work demonstrates that reaching from a crouched posture is preceded by bimanual anticipatory postural adjustments (APAs) that shift the body weight to the stance limb. Weight-shift APAs are more robust in an unstable body posture (knees together) and involve the shoulder and elbow extensors of the reach arm and shoulder flexor of the stance arm. This pattern mirrors the forelimb coordination of cats reaching and humans initiating a step.

Quantitative evaluation of trunk function and the StartReact effect during reaching in patients with cervical and thoracic spinal cord injury

Objective.Impaired trunk stability is frequent in spinal cord injury (SCI), but there is a lack of quantitative measures for assessing trunk function. Our objectives were to: (a) evaluate trunk muscle activity and movement patterns during a reaching task in SCI patients, (b) compare the impact of cervical (cSCI) and thoracic (tSCI) injuries in trunk function, and (c) investigate the effects of a startling acoustic stimulus (SAS) in these patients.Approach.Electromyographic (EMG) and smartphone accelerometer data were recorded from 15 cSCI patients, nine tSCI patients, and 24 healthy controls, during a reaching task requiring trunk tilting. We calculated the response time (RespT) until pressing a target button, EMG onset latencies and amplitudes, and trunk tilt, lateral deviation, and other movement features from accelerometry. Statistical analysis was applied to analyze the effects of group (cSCI, tSCI, control) and condition (SAS, non-SAS) in each outcome measure.Main results.SCI patients, especially those with cSCI, presented significantly longer RespT and EMG onset latencies than controls. Moreover, in SCI patients, forward trunk tilt was accompanied by significant lateral deviation. RespT and EMG latencies were remarkably shortened by the SAS (the so-called StartReact effect) in tSCI patients and controls, but not in cSCI patients, who also showed higher variability.Significance. The combination of EMG and smartphone accelerometer data can provide quantitative measures for the assessment of trunk function in SCI. Our results show deficits in postural control and compensatory strategies employed by SCI patients, including delayed responses and higher lateral deviations, possibly to improve sitting balance. This is the first study investigating the StartReact responses in trunk muscles in SCI patients and shows that the SAS significantly accelerates RespT in tSCI, but not in cSCI, suggesting an increased cortical control exerted by these patients.

When reflex reactions oppose voluntary commands: The StartReact effect on eye opening

A startling auditory stimulus (SAS) induces a reflex response involving, among other reactions, a strong contraction of the orbicularis oculi muscle (OOc) and subsequent eye closure. A SAS also induces the StartReact effect, a significant shortening of reaction time in subjects ready for task execution. We examined the obvious conflict appearing when a StartReact paradigm requires participants with eyes closed to open their eyes to look for a visual target. We recorded OOc EMG activity and eyelid movements in healthy volunteers who were instructed to open their eyes at perception of a somatosensory imperative stimulus (IS) and locate the position of a Libet's clock's hand shown on a computer screen at 80 cm distance. In 6 out of 20 trials, we delivered a SAS simultaneously with the IS. The main outcome measures were reaction time at onset of eyelid movement and the time gap (TG) separating subjective assessment of the clock's hand position from real IS issuing. Control experiments included reaction time to eye closing and target location with eyes open to the same IS. Reaction time was significantly faster in SAS than in noSAS trials and slower for eye opening than for eye closing in both conditions. In the eye-opening task, TG was significantly shorter in SAS with respect to noSAS trials, despite the presence of the SAS-related burst in the OOc before EMG cessation. Our results indicate that the StartReact effect speeds up eye opening and location of a target in the visual field despite the startle reaction opposing the task.

Cumulative distribution functions: An alternative approach to examine the triggering of prepared motor actions in the StartReact effect

There has been much debate concerning whether startling sensory stimuli can activate a fast-neural pathway for movement triggering (StartReact) which is different from that of voluntary movements. Activity in sternocleidomastoid (SCM) electromyogram is suggested to indicate activation of this pathway. We evaluated whether SCM activity can accurately identify trials which may differ in their neurophysiological triggering and assessed the use of cumulative distribution functions (CDFs) of reaction time (RT) data to identify trials with the shortest RTs for analysis. Using recent data sets from the StartReact literature, we examined the relationship between RT and SCM activity. We categorised data into short/longer RT bins using CDFs and used linear mixed-effects models to compare potential conclusions that can be drawn when categorising data on the basis of RT versus on the basis of SCM activity. The capacity of SCM to predict RT is task-specific, making it an unreliable indicator of distinct neurophysiological mechanisms. Classification of trials using CDFs is capable of capturing potential task- or muscle-related differences in triggering whilst avoiding the pitfalls of the traditional SCM activity-based classification method. We conclude that SCM activity is not always evident on trials that show the early triggering of movements seen in the StartReact phenomenon. We further propose that a more comprehensive analysis of data may be achieved through the inclusion of CDF analyses. These findings have implications for future research investigating movement triggering as well as for potential therapeutic applications of StartReact.

StartReact effects are dependent on engagement of startle reflex circuits: support for a subcortically mediated initiation pathway

The "StartReact" effect refers to the rapid involuntary triggering of a prepared movement in response to a loud startling acoustic stimulus (SAS). This effect is typically confirmed by the presence of short-latency electromyographic activity in startle reflex-related muscles such as the sternocleidomastoid (SCM); however, there is debate regarding the specific neural pathways involved in the StartReact effect. Some research has implicated a subcortically mediated pathway, which would predict different response latencies depending on the presence of a startle reflex. Alternatively, other research has suggested that this effect involves the same pathways responsible for voluntary response initiation and simply reflects higher preparatory activation levels, and thus faster voluntary initiation. To distinguish between these competing hypotheses, the present study assessed preparation level during a simple reaction time (RT) task involving wrist extension in response to a control tone or a SAS. Premotor RT and startle circuitry engagement (as measured by SCM activation) were determined for each trial. Additionally, preparation level at the go signal on each trial was measured using motor-evoked potentials (MEP) elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Results showed that SAS trial RTs were significantly shorter (P = 0.009) in the presence of startle-related SCM activity. Nevertheless, preparation levels (as indexed by MEP amplitude) were statistically equivalent between trials with and without SCM activation. These results indicate that the StartReact effect relates to engagement of the startle reflex circuitry rather than simply being a result of an increased level of preparatory activation.NEW & NOTEWORTHY The neural mechanism underlying the early triggering of goal-directed actions by a startling acoustic stimulus (SAS) is unclear. We show that although significant reaction time differences were evident depending on whether the SAS elicited a startle reflex, motor preparatory activation was the same. Thus, in a highly prepared state, the short-latency responses associated with the StartReact effect appear to be related to engagement of startle reflex circuitry, not differences in motor preparatory level.

Stabilizing stretch reflexes are modulated independently from the rapid release of perturbation-triggered motor plans

Responses elicited after the shortest latency spinal reflexes but prior to the onset of voluntary activity can display sophistication beyond a stereotypical reflex. Two distinct behaviors have been identified for these rapid motor responses, often called long-latency reflexes. The first is to maintain limb stability by opposing external perturbations. The second is to quickly release motor actions planned prior to the disturbance, often called a triggered reaction. This study investigated their interaction when motor tasks involve both limb stabilization and motor planning. We used a robotic manipulator to change the stability of the haptic environment during 2D arm reaching tasks, and to apply perturbations that could elicit rapid motor responses. Stabilizing reflexes were modulated by the orientation of the haptic environment (field effect) whereas triggered reactions were modulated by the target to which subjects were instructed to reach (target effect). We observed that there were no significant interactions between the target and field effects in the early (50–75 ms) portion of the long-latency reflex, indicating that these components of the rapid motor response are initially controlled independently. There were small but significant interactions for two of the six relevant muscles in the later portion (75–100 ms) of the reflex response. In addition, the target effect was influenced by the direction of the perturbation used to elicit the motor response, indicating a later feedback correction in addition to the early component of the triggered reaction. Together, these results demonstrate how distinct components of the long-latency reflex can work independently and together to generate sophisticated rapid motor responses that integrate planning with reaction to uncertain conditions.

High-intensity transcranial magnetic stimulation reveals differential cortical contributions to prepared responses

Corticospinal output pathways have typically been considered to be the primary driver for voluntary movements of the hand/forearm; however, more recently, reticulospinal drive has also been implicated in the production of these movements. Although both pathways may play a role, the reticulospinal tract is thought to have stronger connections to flexor muscles than to extensors. Similarly, movements involuntarily triggered via a startling acoustic stimulus (SAS) are believed to receive greater reticular input than voluntary movements. To investigate a differential role of reticulospinal drive depending on movement type or acoustic stimulus, corticospinal drive was transiently interrupted using high-intensity transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) applied during the reaction time (RT) interval. This TMS-induced suppression of cortical drive leads to RT delays that can be used to assess cortical contributions to movement. Participants completed targeted flexion and extension movements of the wrist in a simple RT paradigm in response to a control auditory go signal or SAS. Occasionally, suprathreshold TMS was applied over the motor cortical representation for the prime mover. Results revealed that TMS significantly increased RT in all conditions. There was a significantly longer TMS-induced RT delay seen in extension movements than in flexion movements and a greater RT delay in movements initiated in response to control stimuli compared with SAS. These results suggest that the contribution of reticulospinal drive is larger for wrist flexion than for extension. Similarly, movements triggered involuntarily by an SAS appear to involve greater reticulospinal drive, and relatively less corticospinal drive, than those that are voluntarily initiated. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Through the use of the transcranial magnetic stimulation-induced silent period, we provide novel evidence for a greater contribution of reticulospinal drive, and a relative decrease in corticospinal drive, to movements involuntarily triggered by a startle compared with voluntary movements. These results also provide support for the notion that both cortical and reticular structures are involved in the neural pathway underlying startle-triggered movements. Furthermore, our results indicate greater reticulospinal contribution to wrist flexion than extension movements.

Impaired posture, movement preparation, and execution during both paretic and nonparetic reaching following stroke

Posture and movement planning, preparation, and execution of a goal-directed reaching movement are impaired in individuals with stroke. No studies have shown whether the deficits are generally impaired or are specific to the lesioned hemisphere/paretic arm. This study utilized StartReact (SR) responses elicited by loud acoustic stimuli (LAS) to investigate the preparation and execution of anticipatory postural adjustments (APAs) and reach movement response during both paretic and nonparetic arm reaching in individuals with stroke and in age-matched healthy controls. Subjects were asked to get ready after receiving a warning cue and to reach at a "go" cue. An LAS was delivered at -500, -200, and 0 ms relative to the go cue. Kinetic, kinematic, and electromyographic data were recorded to characterize APA-reach movement responses. Individuals with stroke demonstrated systemwide deficits in posture and in movement planning, preparation, and execution of APA-reach sequence as shown by significant reduction in the incidence of SR response and impaired APA-reach performance, with greater deficits during paretic arm reaching. Use of trunk compensation strategy as characterized by greater involvement of trunk and pelvic rotation was utilized by individuals with stroke during paretic arm reaching compared with nonparetic arm reaching and healthy controls. Our findings have implications for upper extremity and postural control, suggesting that intervention should include training not only for the paretic arm but also for the nonparetic arm with simultaneous postural control requirements to improve the coordination of the APA-reach performance and subsequently reduce instability while functional tasks are performed during standing. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Our study is the first to show that nonparetic arm reaching also demonstrates impairment in posture and movement planning, preparation, and execution when performed during standing by individuals with stroke. In addition, we found compensatory trunk and pelvic rotations were used during a standing reach task for the paretic arms. The findings have clinical implications for upper extremity and postural rehabilitation, suggesting that training should include the nonparetic arms and incorporate simultaneous postural control demands.

Effort to perceive the position of one visual horizontal line relative to another appearing close causes an earlier postural response to backward perturbation

Humans make an effort to stabilize the body when a stable eye position is required to improve visibility. Perceiving the position of one visual object relative to another appearing close is relatively difficult compared with perceiving those objects appearing at a distance. Thus, humans must make an effort to stabilize their body to improve visibility when they attempt to perceive the position of one object relative to another appearing close. This process may enhance the response to postural perturbation. The present study tested this hypothesis. A total of 15 healthy participants maintained a position standing over the platform and gazed at a horizontal fixation line in front of them. One of the two warning sound cues was given in each trial; one predicted the forthcoming appearance of a horizontal line 2 mm above or below the horizontal fixation line (indistinct condition), and another predicted the forthcoming appearance of the horizontal line 2 cm above or 2 cm below the horizontal fixation line (distinct condition). After the warning sound cue, the support surface moved in the forward or backward direction. A horizontal line appeared 40 ms after the onset of the support surface motion at the level above or below the horizontal fixation line with the distance from the horizontal fixation line as the warning cue predicted. The participants verbally stated the position of the horizontal line relative to the horizontal fixation line after the offset of the support surface movement. The displacement of the head and sacrum was measured with acceleration sensors. A test of the simple main effect following an analysis of variance revealed that the peak downward displacement of the pelvis in the indistinct condition was significantly earlier than that in the distinct condition. This finding indicated that the effort to stabilize the body for improvement of visibility enhances the response of the pelvis to the forward movement of the support surface. This effect may be used for improvement of the postural response in patients with problems with postural control.

StartReact effects in first dorsal interosseous muscle are absent in a pinch task, but present when combined with elbow flexion

Objective

To provide a neurophysiological tool for assessing sensorimotor pathways, which may differ for those involving distal muscles in simple tasks from those involving distal muscles in a kinetic chain task, or proximal muscles in both.

Methods

We compared latencies and magnitudes of motor responses in a reaction time paradigm in a proximal (biceps brachii, BB) and a distal (first dorsal interosseous, FDI) muscle following electrical stimuli used as imperative signal (IS) delivered to the index finger. These stimuli were applied during different motor tasks: simple tasks involving either one muscle, e.g. flexing the elbow for BB (FLEX), or pinching a pen for FDI (PINCH); combined tasks engaging both muscles by pinching and flexing simultaneously (PINCH-FLEX). Stimuli were of varying intensity and occasionally elicited a startle response, and a StartReact effect.

Results

In BB, response latencies decreased gradually and response amplitudes increased progressively with increasing IS intensities for non-startling trials, while for trials containing startle responses, latencies were uniformly shortened and response amplitudes similarly augmented across all IS intensities in both FLEX and PINCH-FLEX. In FDI, response latencies decreased gradually and response amplitudes increased progressively with increasing IS intensities in both PINCH and PINCH-FLEX for non-startling trials, but, unlike in BB for the simple task, in PINCH for trials containing startle responses as well. In PINCH-FLEX, FDI latencies were uniformly shortened and amplitudes similarly increased across all stimulus intensities whenever startle signs were present.

Conclusions

Our results suggest the presence of different sensorimotor pathways supporting a dissociation between simple tasks that involve distal upper limb muscles (FDI in PINCH) from simple tasks involving proximal muscles (BB in FLEX), and combined tasks that engage both muscles (FDI and BB in PINCH-FLEX), all in accordance with differential importance in the control of movements by cortical and subcortical structures.

Significance

Simple assessment tools may provide useful information regarding the differential involvement of sensorimotor pathways in the control of both simple and combined tasks that engage proximal and distal muscles.

Evidence for startle as a measurable behavioral indicator of motor learning

The ability of the classic startle reflex to evoke voluntarily prepared movement involuntarily has captured the attention of neuroscientists for its wide-ranging functional utility and potential uses in patient populations. To date, there is only one documented task resistant to the startReact phenomenon-index finger abduction. Previous reports have suggested the lack of startReact is due to different neural mechanisms driving individuated finger movement and more proximal joint control (e.g. elbow, wrist movement). However, an alternative hypothesis exists. Though not particularly difficult to execute, isolated index finger abduction is rarely performed during activities of daily living and is not a natural correlate to common individuated finger tasks. We propose that startReact can be evoked during individuated finger movements but only during tasks that are highly trained or familiar. The objective of this study was to determine the impact of a 2-week training regimen on the ability to elicit startReact. We found evidence in support of our hypothesis that following training, individuated movements of the hands (specifically index finger abduction) become susceptible to startReact. This is significant not only because it indicates that individuated finger movements are in fact amenable to startReact, but also that startle has differential response characteristics in novel tasks compared to highly trained tasks suggesting that startle is a measurable behavioral indicator of motor learning.

Motor preparation in picture naming tasks

In certain circumstances, words can be uttered as an involuntary action. We hypothesize that, once pronunciation of a word is fully prepared it can be triggered as a reflex with no need for cortical processing. We used modified protocols of picture naming tasks, with different levels of cognitive demands, to measure reaction time to word pronunciation (RTWP). In test trials, picture presentation was accompanied by a startling auditory stimulus (SAS). When one and the same picture was repeatedly shown, SAS shortened RTWP by about 30% (StartReact effect), which did not occur when random pictures were shown. If subjects were led to learn which picture was to appear after repeated presentation of three pictures in sequence, they exhibited again the StartReact effect. We conclude that word pronunciation may be fully prepared for execution in absence of cognitive demands. However, the StartReact effect is inhibited during cognitive tasks.

Further analysis of the unintentional discharge of firearms in law enforcement

Empirical analysis of the contexts in which UDs occur in law enforcement have only recently begun to emerge. We analyzed a novel sample of UD reports (N = 171) that occurred between 1992 and 2016, collected from one non-U.S. and three U.S. law enforcement entities. Using an established antecedent-behavior-consequence (A-B-C) taxonomy, reports were analyzed by context, officer behavior, type of firearm, injuries, deaths, and property damages. This study is the first to empirically document reports of UDs caused by the startle response and the first to analyze a substantial sample of UDs that involved handguns with a double-action only trigger mechanism. An expanded analysis of UD consequences suggested that deaths and injuries might be more prevalent than previously reported.

Sub-threshold transcranial magnetic stimulation applied after the go-signal facilitates reaction time under control but not startle conditions

The presentation of a startling acoustic stimulus (SAS) in a simple reaction time (RT) task significantly reduces RT due to the involuntary early initiation of a prepared movement; however, the underlying neural mechanism remains unclear. It has been proposed that a SAS triggers a cortically stored motor program by involuntarily increasing initiation-related activation. Sub-threshold transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) can be used to investigate cortical processes, as it increases cortical excitability for 6-30 ms and significantly reduces RT. The purpose of the present experiments was to determine whether the application of sub-threshold TMS over motor cortex in close temporal proximity to a SAS would facilitate startle RT in the same manner as control RT, providing evidence for cortical involvement in startle-related RTs. Participants completed a simple RT task requiring targeted wrist extension in response to an auditory go-signal, which was randomly replaced by a SAS on 25% of trials. On a subset of trials, sub-threshold TMS was applied 30 ms following the go-signal in control trials or at -15, 0, +15 or +30 ms with respect to the SAS in startle trials. In all three experiments, sham and real TMS significantly reduced RT in control trials, with real TMS having a larger effect, but there was no effect of either real or sham TMS on startle-related RT. These results suggest that there may be limited cortical involvement in the initiation of movements in response to a SAS. As an alternative, startle may produce the fastest possible RTs, with little room for additional facilitation.

Twist and turn into chronic disorders of consciousness: Potential role of the auditory stapedial reflex

BACKGROUND

Patients suffering from chronic disorders of consciousness (DOC), including minimally conscious state (MCS) and unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (UWS), typically show an awareness impairment paralleled by a significant reflex hyper-excitability, which depend on the cortical deafferentation following brain-damage-induced thalamocortical system deterioration. Nonetheless, recent studies have shown a residual preservation of cortico-subcortical pathways that may sustain residual fragments of awareness in some DOC patients.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of our study was to assess whether the cortical modulation of auditory stapedial reflex (ASR) could be a marker of a higher degree of brain network connectivity, which is a fundamental prerequisite for awareness generation and maintenance.

METHODS

We applied a repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) protocol over the primary auditory area and measured the neuromodulation effects on ASR threshold (ASRt) in a DOC sample and a healthy control group (HC).

RESULTS

We observed an ASRt reduction in all the HC and MCS individuals, in parallel to a better sound-induced motor responsiveness in MCS sample, while all the UWS patients, but two, did not show any significant ASRt modulation.

CONCLUSION

We hypothesize that our conditioning protocol may have entrained and potentiated some spared cortico-subcortical networks that sustained the clinical and electrophysiological amelioration we found. Our data electrophysiologically demonstrate for the first time that primary the auditory area can influence ASR elicitation, and such finding may support the DOC differential diagnosis.

COMT Genotype and Sensory and Sensorimotor Gating in High and Low Hypnotizable Subjects

We investigated the association between hypnotizability, COMT polymorphism, P50 suppression ratio, and prepulse inhibition of acoustic startle response (ASR) in 21 high (HH) and 19 low (LH) hypnotizable subjects. The frequency of Met/Met carriers of COMT polymorphysm was higher in HH than in LH group (33.3% versus 10.6%, p = .049). Increased ASR amplitude and latency and decreased prepulse inhibition at 120 ms lead interval were found in the HH compared to the LH group. The effect of COMT genotype on prepulse inhibition was observed in LH group only. No between-group differences in P50 measures were found. The obtained results suppose the participation of dopamine system in mechanisms of hypnotizability and different allocation of attentional resources in HH and LH subjects.

Mechanical perturbations can elicit triggered reactions in the absence of a startle response

Perturbations delivered to the upper limbs elicit reflexive responses in stretched muscle at short- (M1: 25-50 ms) and long- (M2: 50-100 ms) latencies. When presented in a simple reaction time (RT) task, the perturbation can also elicit a preprogrammed voluntary response at a latency (< 100 ms) that overlaps the M2 response. This early appearance of the voluntary response following a proprioceptive stimulus causing muscle stretch is called a triggered reaction. Recent work has demonstrated that a perturbation also elicits activity in sternocleidomastoid (SCM) over a time-course consistent with the startle response and it was, therefore, proposed that the StartReact effect underlies triggered reactions (Ravichandran et al., Exp Brain Res 230:59-69, 2013). The present work investigated whether perturbation-evoked SCM activity results from startle or postural control and whether triggered reactions can also occur in the absence of startle. In Experiment 1, participants "compensated" against a wrist extension perturbation. A prepulse inhibition (PPI) stimulus (known to attenuate startle) was randomly presented before the perturbation. Rather than attenuating SCM activity, the responses in SCM were advanced by the PPI stimulus. In Experiment 2, participants "assisted" a wrist extension perturbation. The perturbation did not reliably elicit startle but despite this, two-thirds of trials had RTs of less than 100 ms and the earliest responses began at ~ 70 ms. These findings suggest that SCM activity following a perturbation is the result of postural control and is not related to startle. Moreover, an overt startle response is not a prerequisite for the elicitation of a triggered reaction.

Biomechanical procedure to assess sleep restriction on motor control and learning

The analysis of sleep quality during long periods and its impact on motor control and learning performance are crucial aspects for human health. The aim of this study is to analyze effects of chronic sleep restriction on motor performance. It is intended to establish motor control indicators in sleep quality analysis. A wearable actigraphy that records accelerometry, ambient light, and body temperature was used to monitor the sleep habits of 12 healthy subjects for two weeks before performing motor control and learning tests. The day of the motor test, the subjects filled two questionnaires about the quality of sleep (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index - PSQI) and sleepiness (Epworth Sleepiness Scale - ESS). Afterwards they performed a coincident timing task that consisted of hitting a virtual target falling on the screen with the hand. An elbow flexion in the horizontal plane had to be performed on the correct time to reach the real target on a table at the same time as the virtual target on the screen. The subjects performed three sets of acquisition and transfer blocks of the coincident timing task. The subjects were clustered in two groups based on the PSQI and ESS scores. Actigraphy and motor control parameters (L5, correct responses, time variance) were compared between groups and experimental sets. The group with better sleep parameters did show a constant performance across blocks of task acquisition while the bad sleeper group improved from the first to the second acquisition block. Despite of this improvement, their performance is not better than the one of the good sleepers group. Although the number of subjects is low and it should be increased, these results indicate that the subjects with better sleep converged rapidly to a high level of performance, while the worse sleepers needed more trials to learn the task and their performance was not superior to the other group.

Go-activation endures following the presentation of a stop-signal: evidence from startle

It has been proposed that, in a stop-signal task (SST), independent go- and stop-processes "race" to control behavior. If the go-process wins, an overt response is produced, whereas, if the stop-process wins, the response is withheld. One prediction that follows from this proposal is that, if the activation associated with one process is enhanced, it is more likely to win the race. We looked to determine whether these initiation and inhibition processes (and thus response outcomes) could be manipulated by using a startling acoustic stimulus (SAS), which has been shown to provide additional response activation. In the present study, participants were to respond to a visual go-stimulus; however, if a subsequent stop-signal appeared, they were to inhibit the response. The stop-signal was presented at a delay corresponding to a probability of responding of 0.4 (determined from a baseline block of trials). On stop-trials, a SAS was presented either simultaneously with the go-signal or stop-signal or 100, 150, or 200 ms following the stop-signal. Results showed that presenting a SAS during stop-trials led to an increase in probability of responding when presented with or following the stop-signal. The latency of SAS responses at the stop-signal + 150 ms and stop-signal + 200 ms probe times suggests that they would have been voluntarily inhibited but instead were involuntarily initiated by the SAS. Thus results demonstrate that go-activation endures even 200 ms following a stop-signal and remains accessible well after the response has been inhibited, providing evidence against a winner-take-all race between independent go- and stop-processes.

NEW & NOTEWORTHY

In this study, a startling acoustic stimulus (SAS) was used to determine whether response outcome could be manipulated in a stop-signal task. Results revealed that presenting a SAS during stop-signal trials led to an increase in probability of responding even when presented 200 ms following the stop-signal. The latency of SAS responses indicates that go-activation remains accessible and modifiable well after the response is voluntarily inhibited, providing evidence against an irrevocable commitment to inhibition.

Foreknowledge of an impending startling stimulus does not affect the proportion of startle reflexes or latency of StartReact responses

During a simple reaction time (RT) task, movements can be initiated early and involuntarily through presentation of a loud startling acoustic stimulus (SAS), a phenomenon termed the StartReact effect. In order to infer that activity in startle-related structures led to the early response triggering, it is important to observe a concurrent startle reflex in sternocleidomastoid. It is generally accepted that to consistently elicit a startle reflex, the SAS must be both intense and unpredictable. However, it remains unclear what effect explicit foreknowledge of an impending SAS has on the effectiveness of a SAS to elicit a startle reflex when preparing a motor response. To test this, participants completed two separate blocks of a simple RT task (counterbalanced order), where the control auditory go-signal was replaced with a SAS on 20 % of trials. In an unwarned block, knowledge of the trial type (SAS vs. control) was not provided in advance, while in a warned block, the trial type was forewarned. Results revealed that while foreknowledge of an impending SAS reduced the magnitude of the startle reflex, it did not affect the proportion of startle reflexes elicited or the magnitude of the StartReact effect. An increase in control trial RT was observed during the unwarned block, but only when it was performed first. These results indicate that preparation of a motor response leads to sufficiently increased activation in startle-related neural structures such that even with explicit knowledge of an upcoming SAS, participants are unable to proactively gate the upcoming sensory input.

An examination of the startle response during upper limb stretch perturbations

Unexpected presentation of a startling auditory stimulus (SAS>120 decibels) in a reaction time (RT) paradigm results in the startle reflex and an early release (<100ms) of the preplanned motor response (StartReact effect). Mechanical perturbations applied to the upper limbs elicit short- (M1) and long-latency (M2) stretch reflexes and have also been shown to initiate intended motor responses early (<100ms). Ravichandran et al. (2013) recently proposed that unexpected delivery of a perturbation could also elicit a startle response and therefore the StartReact effect may be responsible for the early trigger of a preplanned response. To investigate this further, we examined startle incidence, RT, and stretch reflex modulation for both expected and unexpected perturbations. In Experiment 1, participants performed active (ACT) and passive (DNI) conditions to an expected large perturbation (similar to previous studies examining M2). The startle response was not observed; however, the perturbation still elicited the voluntary response at short latency (<100ms) and goal-dependent modulation of the M2 response was observed. In Experiment 2, participants performed ACT and DNI conditions to a weak auditory stimulus or a small wrist perturbation. On unexpected trials we probed startle circuitry with a large perturbation or SAS. The SAS consistently elicited a startle response in both ACT and DNI conditions, but startle-like activity was only observed on 17.4% of ACT perturbation probe trials. Our findings suggest that while unexpected upper limb perturbations can be startling, startle triggering of the preplanned voluntary response is not the primary mechanism responsible for goal-dependent modulation of the M2 response.

Startle reveals decreased response preparatory activation during a stop-signal task

In a stop-signal task participants are instructed to initiate a movement in response to a go signal, but to inhibit this movement if an infrequent stop signal is presented after the go. Reaction time (RT) in a stop-signal task is typically longer compared with that in a simple RT task, which may be attributed to a reduced readiness to initiate the response caused by the possibility of having to inhibit the response. The purpose of this experiment was to probe the preparatory activation level of the motor response during a stop-signal task using a startling acoustic stimulus (SAS), which has been shown to involuntarily trigger sufficiently prepared responses at a short latency. Participants completed two separate tasks: a simple RT task, followed by a stop-signal RT task. During both tasks, an SAS (120 dB) was pseudorandomly presented concurrently with the go signal. As expected, RT during the simple RT task was significantly shorter than during the stop-signal task. A significant reduction in RT was noted when an SAS was presented during the simple RT task; however, during the stop-signal task, an SAS resulted in either a significant speeding or a moderate delay in RT. Additionally, the subset of SAS trial responses with the shortest RT latencies produced during the stop-signal task were also delayed compared with the short-latency SAS trial responses observed during the simple RT task. Despite evidence that a response was prepared in advance of the go signal during a stop-signal task, it appears that the amount of preparatory activation was reduced compared with that achieved during a simple RT task.

Impaired motor preparation and execution during standing reach in people with chronic stroke

Movement preparation of both anticipatory postural adjustments (APAs) and goal directed movement during a standing reaching task in adults with chronic hemiparesis and healthy controls was investigated. Using a simple reaction time paradigm, while standing on two separate force platforms, subjects received a warning light cue to "get ready to reach" followed 2.5s later by an imperative light cue to "reach as quickly as possible" with the paretic arm (matched arm for controls) to touch a target in front of them for a total of 90 trials. In 30 of the reaching trials a loud acoustic stimulus (LAS) of 123 dB was randomly - -200, or 0ms relative to the "go" cue. APA (postural) responses were characterized by the onset and maximal posterior displacement of center of pressure (CoP) and onset/offset of electromyography (EMG) from tibialis anterior (TA), soleus (SOL), while reach was characterized by onset and maximal forward displacement of the reach hand and onset of the anterior (AD), biceps brachii (BB) and middle deltoid (MD). Subjects with stroke, demonstrated a marked reduction in the occurrence of the StartReact responses for both APA and forward reach at all LAS time points indicating movement preparation dysfunction. Movement execution during a cued reach showed significant delays in APA and reach onsets, significant reduction in the magnitude of APA (posterior CoP displacement) and reach excursion, and an increased latency between the APA and reach compared to controls. EMG activation patterns for the TA and SOL demonstrated co contraction compared to the temporally sequenced pattern of control subjects. When LAS was provided at the "go" there were earlier but not significant differences in APA onset latency compared to reaching without LAS and significant delays in reach onset latency when compared to control subjects with or without LAS. An early burst of EMG in biceps brachii muscles with a further delay of the reach onset compared to reaching without LAS may be indicative of interference of a classical startle reflex activating elbow flexors. Results indicated impairments in movement preparation of both APA's and goal directed UE movement in individuals with stroke which impact the functional performance of reaching in the standing position.

Triggering prepared actions by sudden sounds: reassessing the evidence for a single mechanism

Loud acoustic stimuli can unintentionally elicit volitional acts when a person is in a state of readiness to execute them (the StartReact effect). It has been assumed that the same subcortical pathways and brain regions underlie all instances of the StartReact effect. They are proposed to involve the startle reflex pathways, and the eliciting mechanism is distinct from other ways in which sound can affect the motor system. We present an integrative review which shows that there is no evidence to support these assumptions. We argue that motor command generation for learned, volitional orofacial, laryngeal and distal limb movements is cortical and the StartReact effect for such movements involves transcortical pathways. In contrast, command generation for saccades, locomotor corrections and postural adjustments is subcortical and subcortical pathways are implicated in the StartReact effect for these cases. We conclude that the StartReact effect is not a special phenomenon mediated by startle reflex pathways, but rather is a particular manifestation of the excitatory effects of intense stimulation on the central nervous system.

Audiomotor Integration in Minimally Conscious State: Proof of Concept!

Patients suffering from chronic disorders of consciousness (DOC) are characterized by profound unawareness and an impairment of large-scale cortical and subcortical connectivity. In this study, we applied an electrophysiological approach aimed at identifying the residual audiomotor connectivity patterns that are thought to be linked to awareness. We measured some markers of audiomotor integration (AMI) in 20 patients affected by DOC, before and after the application of a repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation protocol (rTMS) delivered over the left primary motor area (M1), paired to a transauricular alternating current stimulation. Our protocol induced potentiating of the electrophysiological markers of AMI and M1 excitability, paired to a clinical improvement, in all of the patients with minimally conscious state (MCS) but in none of those suffering from unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (UWS). Our protocol could be a promising approach to potentiate the functional connectivity within large-scale audiomotor networks, thus allowing clinicians to differentiate patients affected by MCS from UWS, besides the clinical assessment.

The role of the cerebral cortex in postural responses to externally induced perturbations

The ease with which we avoid falling down belies a highly sophisticated and distributed neural network for controlling reactions to maintain upright balance. Although historically these reactions were considered within the sub cortical domain, mounting evidence reveals a distributed network for postural control including a potentially important role for the cerebral cortex. Support for this cortical role comes from direct measurement associated with moments of induced instability as well as indirect links between cognitive task performance and balance recovery. The cerebral cortex appears to be directly involved in the control of rapid balance reactions but also setting the central nervous system in advance to optimize balance recovery reactions even when a future threat to stability is unexpected. In this review the growing body of evidence that now firmly supports a cortical role in the postural responses to externally induced perturbations is presented. Moreover, an updated framework is advanced to help understand how cortical contributions may influence our resistance to falls and on what timescale. The implications for future studies into the neural control of balance are discussed.

A broadband acoustic stimulus is more likely than a pure tone to elicit a startle reflex and prepared movements

A loud acoustic stimulus that elicits a startle reflex has long been used to study the neurophysiology of cortical and subcortical neural circuits. More recent investigations have shown that startle can act as an early trigger for prepared actions, suggesting a brainstem role in the preparation and initiation of actions. However, in order to attribute any startle-triggered voluntary responses to activation in subcortical structures it is necessary to measure a startle-related activity in these structures. The current study investigated the most effective stimulus for eliciting a detectible startle reflex. While more intense stimuli are more likely to elicit a startle reflex, the current study examined whether broadband noise is more likely than a pure tone to produce a startle at various intensities above 100 dB. Participants performed a button release reaction time task in response to either a 1 kHz tone or a broadband noise pulse with intensities ranging from 82 to 124 dB. Reaction time and EMG from the wrist extensors and the sternocleidomastoid (SCM) were measured. Results showed that startle-related SCM EMG was elicited more frequently by broadband noise compared to pure tones. The higher proportion of startle reflexes observed in SCM was associated with a higher incidence of the voluntary task being triggered early. A higher incidence of startle following broadband noise is attributed to the activation of a larger proportion of the basilar membrane; thus, a lower intensity broadband noise stimulus may be used to elicit startle reflex at a similar rate as a higher intensity pure tone.

What startles tell us about control of posture and gait

Recently, there has been an increase in studies evaluating startle reflexes and StartReact, many in tasks involving postural control and gait. These studies have provided important new insights. First, several experiments indicate a superimposition of startle reflex activity on the postural response during unexpected balance perturbations. Overlap in the expression of startle reflexes and postural responses emphasizes the possibility of, at least partly, a common substrate for these two types of behavior. Second, it is recognized that the range of behaviors, susceptible to StartReact, has expanded considerably. Originally this work was concentrated on simple voluntary ballistic movements, but gait initiation, online step adjustments and postural responses can be initiated earlier by a startling stimulus as well, indicating advanced motor preparation of posture and gait. Third, recent experiments on StartReact using TMS and patients with corticospinal lesions suggest that this motor preparation involves a close interaction between cortical and subcortical structures. In this review, we provide a comprehensive overview on startle reflexes, StartReact, and their interaction with posture and gait.

StartReact effects support different pathophysiological mechanisms underlying freezing of gait and postural instability in Parkinson's disease

Introduction

The pathophysiology underlying postural instability in Parkinson’s disease is poorly understood. The frequent co-existence with freezing of gait raises the possibility of shared pathophysiology. There is evidence that dysfunction of brainstem structures contribute to freezing of gait. Here, we evaluated whether dysfunction of these structures contributes to postural instability as well. Brainstem function was assessed by studying the StartReact effect (acceleration of latencies by a startling acoustic stimulus (SAS)).

Methods

We included 25 patients, divided in two different ways: 1) those with postural instability (HY = 3, n = 11) versus those without (HY<3, n = 14); and 2) those with freezing (n = 11) versus those without freezing (n = 14). We also tested 15 matched healthy controls. We tested postural responses by translating a balance platform in the forward direction, resulting in backward balance perturbations. In 25% of trials, the start of the balance perturbation was accompanied by a SAS.

Results

The amplitude of automatic postural responses and length of the first balance correcting step were smaller in patients with postural instability compared to patients without postural instability, but did not differ between freezers and non-freezers. In contrast, the StartReact effect was intact in patients with postural instability but was attenuated in freezers.

Discussion

We suggest that the mechanisms underlying freezing of gait and postural instability in Parkinson’s disease are at least partly different. Underscaling of automatic postural responses and balance-correcting steps both contribute to postural instability. The attenuated StartReact effect was seen only in freezers and likely reflects inadequate representation of motor programs at upper brainstem level.

Neural processes mediating the preparation and release of focal motor output are suppressed or absent during imagined movement

Movements that are executed or imagined activate a similar subset of cortical regions, but the extent to which this activity represents functionally equivalent neural processes is unclear. During preparation for an executed movement, presentation of a startling acoustic stimulus (SAS) evokes a premature release of the planned movement with the spatial and temporal features of the tasks essentially intact. If imagined movement incorporates the same preparatory processes as executed movement, then a SAS should release the planned movement during preparation. This hypothesis was tested using an instructed-delay cueing paradigm during which subjects were required to rapidly release a handheld weight while maintaining the posture of the arm or to perform first-person imagery of the same task while holding the weight. In a subset of trials, a SAS was presented at 1500, 500, or 200 ms prior to the release cue. Task-appropriate preparation during executed and imagined movements was confirmed by electroencephalographic recording of a contingent negative variation waveform. During preparation for executed movement, a SAS often resulted in premature release of the weight with the probability of release progressively increasing from 24 % at -1500 ms to 80 % at -200 ms. In contrast, the SAS rarely (<2 % of trials) triggered a release of the weight during imagined movement. However, the SAS frequently evoked the planned postural response (suppression of bicep brachii muscle activity) irrespective of the task or timing of stimulation (even during periods of postural hold without preparation). These findings provide evidence that neural processes mediating the preparation and release of the focal motor task (release of the weight) are markedly attenuated or absent during imagined movement and that postural and focal components of the task are prepared independently.

Defective sensorimotor integration in preparation for reaction time tasks in patients with multiple sclerosis

Slowness of voluntary movements in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) may be due to various factors, including attentional and cognitive deficits, delays in motor conduction time, and impairment of specific central nervous system circuits. In 13 healthy volunteers and 20 mildly disabled, relapsing-remitting MS patients, we examined simple reaction time (SRT) tasks requiring sensorimotor integration in circuits involving the corpus callosum and the brain stem. A somatosensory stimulus was used as the imperative signal (IS), and subjects were requested to react with either the ipsilateral or the contralateral hand (uncrossed vs. crossed SRT). In 33% of trials, a startling auditory stimulus was presented together with the IS, and the percentage reaction time change with respect to baseline SRT trials was measured (StartReact effect). The difference between crossed and uncrossed SRT, which requires interhemispheric conduction, was significantly larger in patients than in healthy subjects ( P = 0.021). The StartReact effect, which involves activation of brain stem motor pathways, was reduced significantly in patients with respect to healthy subjects (uncrossed trials: P = 0.015; crossed trials: P = 0.005). In patients, a barely significant correlation was found between SRT delay and conduction abnormalities in motor and sensory pathways ( P = 0.02 and P = 0.04, respectively). The abnormalities found specifically in trials reflecting interhemispheric transfer of information, as well as the evidence for reduced subcortical motor preparation, indicate that a delay in reaction time execution in MS patients cannot be explained solely by conduction slowing in motor and sensory pathways but suggest, instead, defective sensorimotor integration mechanisms in at least the two circuits examined.

The StartReact effect in tasks requiring end-point accuracy

OBJECTIVE

Fast and accurate movements are often performed in response to a sensory signal. In reaction time tasks, execution of open loop movements is speeded up when a startling auditory stimulus (SAS) is applied together with the imperative signal (IS). In this study, we examined the effects of a SAS on the performance of a task that demands accuracy.

METHODS

Nine subjects were asked to move a monitored pen to a target point located in a table at a fixed angular distance of 30 degrees from a start point. The target was a spot of three possible diameters: 5, 10, and 20mm. Finger force for pen holding, pen tip pressure against the table and kinematic variables of the forearm movement were measured for three conditions: control, SAS delivered at IS (SAS-IS trials) and SAS delivered during movement execution (SAS-MOV trials).

RESULTS

Two movement phases could be identified in the movement trajectory and force profile. The first phase, ballistic, was significantly shortened in SAS-MOV trials, with earlier and larger peak velocity and peak force with respect to control trials. The second phase, slow approach to target, was longer in SAS-IS trials but not in SAS-MOV trials. Accuracy was maintained throughout all conditions and stimulation modes.

CONCLUSIONS

A SAS speeds up only the first (ballistic) part of the movement in an accuracy task. Slower target approach compensates for the accelerated initial movement. No changes in the last part of the movement are seen when a SAS is delivered after movement onset.

SIGNIFICANCE

The StartReact effect is restricted to the onset of a complex movement, when muscles are activated in a ballistic mode, without feedback.

Responses to startling acoustic stimuli indicate that movement-related activation is constant prior to action: a replication with an alternate interpretation

A recent study by Marinovic et al. (J. Neurophysiol., 2013, 109: 996-1008) used a loud acoustic stimulus to probe motor preparation in a simple reaction time (RT) task. Based on decreasing RT latency and increases in motor output measures as the probe stimulus approached the "go" stimulus, the authors concluded that response-related activation increased abruptly 65 ms prior to the imperative stimulus, a result in contrast to previous literature. However, this study did not measure reflexive startle activity in the sternocleidomastoid (SCM) muscle, which has been used to delineate between response triggering by a loud acoustic stimuli and effects of stimulus intensity and/or intersensory facilitation. Due to this methodological limitation, it was unclear if the data accurately represented movement-related activation changes. In order to provide a measure as to whether response triggering occurred on each trial, the current experiment replicated the study by Marinovic et al., with the collection of muscle activation in the SCM. While the replication analyses involving all trials confirmed similar results to those reported by Marinovic et al., when data were limited to those in which startle-related SCM activation occurred, the results indicated that movement-related activation is constant in the 65 ms prior to action initiation. The difference between analyses suggests that when SCM activation is not considered, results may be confounded by trials in which the probe stimulus does not trigger the prepared response. Furthermore, these results provide additional confirmation that reflexive startle activation in the SCM is a robust indicator of response triggering by a loud acoustic stimulus.

Interactions between stretch and startle reflexes produce task-appropriate rapid postural reactions

Neural pathways underpinning startle reflex and limb stretch reflexes evolved independently and have served vastly different purposes. In their most basic form, the pathways responsible for these reflex responses are relatively simple processing units that produce a motoric response that is proportional to the stimulus received. It is becoming clear however, that rapid responses to external stimuli produced by human and non-human primates are context-dependent in a manner similar to voluntary movements. This mini review discusses the nature of startle and stretch reflex interactions in human and non-human primates and the involvement of the primary motor cortex in their regulation.

Time-interval for integration of stabilizing haptic and visual information in subjects balancing under static and dynamic conditions

Maintaining equilibrium is basically a sensorimotor integration task. The central nervous system (CNS) continually and selectively weights and rapidly integrates sensory inputs from multiple sources, and coordinates multiple outputs. The weighting process is based on the availability and accuracy of afferent signals at a given instant, on the time-period required to process each input, and possibly on the plasticity of the relevant pathways. The likelihood that sensory inflow changes while balancing under static or dynamic conditions is high, because subjects can pass from a dark to a well-lit environment or from a tactile-guided stabilization to loss of haptic inflow. This review article presents recent data on the temporal events accompanying sensory transition, on which basic information is fragmentary. The processing time from sensory shift to reaching a new steady state includes the time to (a) subtract or integrate sensory inputs; (b) move from allocentric to egocentric reference or vice versa; and (c) adjust the calibration of motor activity in time and amplitude to the new sensory set. We present examples of processes of integration of posture-stabilizing information, and of the respective sensorimotor time-intervals while allowing or occluding vision or adding or subtracting tactile information. These intervals are short, in the order of 1–2 s for different postural conditions, modalities and deliberate or passive shift. They are just longer for haptic than visual shift, just shorter on withdrawal than on addition of stabilizing input, and on deliberate than unexpected mode. The delays are the shortest (for haptic shift) in blind subjects. Since automatic balance stabilization may be vulnerable to sensory-integration delays and to interference from concurrent cognitive tasks in patients with sensorimotor problems, insight into the processing time for balance control represents a critical step in the design of new balance- and locomotion training devices.

Subcortical structures in humans can be facilitated by transcranial direct current stimulation

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a noninvasive brain stimulation technique that alters cortical excitability. Interestingly, in recent animal studies facilitatory effects of tDCS have also been observed on subcortical structures. Here, we sought to provide evidence for the potential of tDCS to facilitate subcortical structures in humans as well. Subjects received anodal-tDCS and sham-tDCS on two separate testing days in a counterbalanced order. After stimulation, we assessed the effect of tDCS on two responses that arise from subcortical structures; (1) wrist and ankle responses to an imperative stimulus combined with a startling acoustic stimulus (SAS), and (2) automatic postural responses to external balance perturbations with and without a concurrent SAS. During all tasks, response onsets were significantly faster following anodal-tDCS compared to sham-tDCS, both in trials with and without a SAS. The effect of tDCS was similar for the dominant and non-dominant leg. The SAS accelerated the onsets of ankle and wrist movements and the responses to backward, but not forward perturbations. The faster onsets of SAS-induced wrist and ankle movements and automatic postural responses following stimulation provide strong evidence that, in humans, subcortical structures - in particular the reticular formation - can be facilitated by tDCS. This effect may be explained by two mechanisms that are not mutually exclusive. First, subcortical facilitation may have resulted from enhanced cortico-reticular drive. Second, the applied current may have directly stimulated the reticular formation. Strengthening reticulospinal output by tDCS may be of interest to neurorehabilitation, as there is evidence for reticulospinal compensation after corticospinal lesions.