Intention to be force efficient improves high-level anticipatory coordination of finger positions and forces in young and elderly adults

Distinct sensorimotor mechanisms underlie the control of grasp and manipulation forces for dexterous manipulation

Dexterous manipulation relies on the ability to simultaneously attain two goals: controlling object position and orientation (pose) and preventing object slip. Although object manipulation has been extensively studied, most previous work has focused only on the control of digit forces for slip prevention. Therefore, it remains underexplored how humans coordinate digit forces to prevent object slip and control object pose simultaneously. We developed a dexterous manipulation task requiring subjects to grasp and lift a sensorized object using different grasp configurations while preventing it from tilting. We decomposed digit forces into manipulation and grasp forces for pose control and slip prevention, respectively. By separating biomechanically-obligatory from non-obligatory effects of grasp configuration, we found that subjects prioritized grasp stability over efficiency in grasp force control. Furthermore, grasp force was controlled in an anticipatory fashion at object lift onset, whereas manipulation force was modulated following acquisition of somatosensory and visual feedback of object's dynamics throughout object lift. Mathematical modeling of feasible manipulation forces further confirmed that subjects could not accurately anticipate the required manipulation force prior to acquisition of sensory feedback. Our experimental approach and findings open new research avenues for investigating neural mechanisms underlying dexterous manipulation and biomedical applications.

Object-centered sensorimotor bias of torque control in the chronic stage following stroke

When lifting objects whose center of mass (CoM) are not centered below the handle one must compensate for arising external torques already at lift-off to avoid object tilt. Previous studies showed that finger force scaling during object lifting may be impaired at both hands following stroke. However, torque control in object manipulation has not yet been studied in patients with stroke. In this pilot study, thirteen patients with chronic stage left hemispheric stroke (SL), nine patients with right hemispheric stroke (SR) and hand-matched controls had to grasp and lift an object with the fingertips of their ipsilesional hand at a handle while preventing object tilt. Object CoM and therewith the external torque was varied by either relocating a covert weight or the handle. The compensatory torque at lift-off (Tcom) is the sum of the torque resulting from (1) grip force being produced at different vertical finger positions (∆CoP × GF) and (2) different vertical load forces on both sides of the handle (∆Fy × w/2). When having to rely on sensorimotor memories, ∆CoP × GF was elevated when the object CoM was on the ipsilesional-, but decreased when CoM was on the contralesional side in SL, whereas ∆Fy × w/2 was biased in the opposite direction, resulting in normal Tcom. SR patients applied a smaller ∆CoP × GF when the CoM was on the contralesional side. Torques were not altered when geometric cues were available. Our findings provide evidence for an object-centered spatial bias of manual sensorimotor torque control with the ipsilesional hand following stroke reminiscent of premotor neglect. Both intact finger force-to-position coordination and visuomotor control may compensate for the spatial sensorimotor bias in most stroke patients. Future studies will have to confirm the found bias and evaluate the association with premotor neglect.