Response Inhibition as a Function of Movement Complexity and Movement Type Selection

Sensorimotor Dysfunction Following Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction- an Afferent Perspective: A Scoping Review

Background

Sensorimotor dysfunction is thought to occur following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury which may have implications on future reinjury risk. Dysfunction has been demonstrated within the efferent component of the sensorimotor system. However, no reviews have examined the two main components of the afferent system: the visual and somatosensory systems.

Hypothesis/Purpose

This study aimed to report differences in function (central processing and local processing) within the (1) somatosensory and (2) visual systems between individuals following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and healthy controls (between-subject). The study also aimed to report differences in function within the two systems between the two limbs of an individual following ACLR (within-subject).

Study Design

Scoping review.

Methods

A search was conducted in PubMed, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, Medline and Embase up until September 2021. Level I-IV studies assessing somatosensory and visual systems were included if they compared ACLR limbs to the uninjured contralateral limb (within-subject) or a healthy control limb (between-group). The function of somatosensory and visual systems was assessed across both central processing (processing of information in the central cortex) and local processing (all other assessments outside of central processing of information).

Results

Seventy studies were identified (52 somatosensory, 18 visual). Studies examining somatosensory central processing demonstrated significant differences; 66% of studies exhibited within-subject differences and 100% of the studies exhibited between-group differences. Studies examining local somatosensory processing had mixed findings; 40% of the 'joint position sense (JPS)' and 'threshold to detect motion (TTDM)' studies showed significant within-subject differences (JPS=0.8°-3.8° and TTDPM=0.2°-1.4°) and 42% demonstrated significant between-group differences (JPS=0.4°-5° and TTDPM=0.3°-2.8°). Eighty-three percent of visual central processing studies demonstrated significant dysfunction between-groups with no studies assessing within-subject differences. Fifty percent of the studies examining local visual processing demonstrated a significant between-group difference.

Conclusion

Significant differences in central processing exist within somatosensory and visual systems following ACLR. There is mixed evidence regarding local somatosensory and visual processing. Increased compensation by the visual system and local visual processing dysfunction may occur in conjunction with somatosensory dysfunction.

Controlling the trajectory of a moving object substantially shortens the latency of motor responses to visual stimuli

Motor responses to visual stimuli have shorter latencies for controlling than for initiating movement. The shorter latencies observed for movement control are notably believed to reflect the involvement of forward models when controlling moving limbs. We assessed whether controlling a moving limb is a "requisite" to observe shortened response latencies. The latency of button-press responses to a visual stimulus was compared between conditions involving or not involving the control of a moving object, but never involving any actual control of a body segment. When the motor response controlled a moving object, response latencies were significantly shorter and less variable, probably reflecting a faster sensorimotor processing (as assessed fitting a LATER model to our data). These results suggest that when the task at hand entails a control component, the sensorimotor processing of visual information is hastened, and this even if the task does not require to actually control a moving limb.

The Effect of Odour Valence and Odour Detection Threshold on the Withholding and Cancellation of Reach-to-Press Responses

Introduction

Withholding uninitiated actions and cancelling ongoing ones are two main components of response inhibition, a key element of the executive control. Inhibitory performance is sensitive to emotional contexts elicited by subliminal and supraliminal visual material. However, whether stimuli from other sensory modalities, such as odours, would equally modulate response inhibition remains unclear. Here, we aimed to assess the effect of task-irrelevant odours as a function of their valence and threshold on both action withholding and action cancellation of reach-to-press movements.

Method

Thirty-two healthy participants performed a Go/No-Go task that included the presentation of pleasant (orange) and unpleasant (trimethyloxazole) odour primes at supra- and sub-threshold levels; clean air was included as a control condition. The reach-to-press responses were composed of an initial release phase and a subsequent reaching phase.

Results

Only the supra-threshold pleasant (vs. control) odour impaired action withholding. Moreover, the pleasant (vs. control) odour—presented at both sub- and supra-threshold levels—elicited more accurate Go responses, whereas the sub- and supra-threshold pleasant and unpleasant (vs. control) odours triggered faster responses in the release phase. Additionally, only the supra-threshold pleasant (vs. unpleasant) odour impaired action cancellation in the reaching phase. Furthermore, reaching responses were slower following the supra-threshold unpleasant (vs. control) odour.

Conclusions

Our findings extend the sparse literature on the impact of odour stimuli on goal-directed behaviour, highlighting the role of both odour valence and threshold in the modulation of response inhibition.

Implications

Determining the mechanisms by which odour stimuli modulate response inhibition lays the foundations for research on odour-triggered disinhibition.

Top-down Inhibitory Motor Control Is Preserved in Adults with Developmental Coordination Disorder

Two paradigms were employed to disentangle information processing from executive motor inhibition in adults with Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD). Choice Reaction and Stop Signal Tasks were compared between 13 adults fulfilling DSM-5 DCD criteria and 42 typically developing adults. Additional analyses included 16 probable DCD (pDCD) participants, who had motor difficulties but did not fulfil DSM-5 criteria. Analyses employed frequentist and Bayesian modeling. While DCD+pDCD showed slower reaction times and difficulty initiating Go responses, no impairments in Stop actions were found. These findings indicated no executive deficit in DCD, suggesting that previous results may be explained by inefficient information processing.

Pain and Distraction According to Sensory Modalities: Current Findings and Future Directions

BACKGROUND

This review discusses the findings in the literature on pain and distraction tasks according to their sensory modality. Distraction tasks have been shown to reduce (experimentally induced) acute pain and chronic pain. This can be influenced by nature and by the sensory modalities used in the distraction tasks. Yet the effect on reducing pain according to the sensory modality of the distraction task has received little attention.

METHODS

A bibliographic search was performed in different databases. The studies will be systematized according to the sensory modality in which the distraction task was applied.

RESULTS

The analyzed studies with auditory distractors showed a reduction of acute pain in adults. However, these are not effective at healthy children and in adults with chronic pain. Visual distractors showed promising results in acute pain in adults and children. Similarly, tactile and mixed distractors decreased acute pain in adults.

CONCLUSION

Distraction tasks by diverse sensory modalities have a positive effect on decreasing the perception of acute pain in adults. Future studies are necessary given the paucity of research on this topic, particularly with tactile distractors (there is only one study). Finally, the most rigorous methodology and the use of ecological contexts are encouraged in future research.