reach control
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

44
(FIVE YEARS 6)

H-INDEX

9
(FIVE YEARS 2)

2022 ◽  
Vol 223 ◽  
pp. 103494
Author(s):  
Raviraj Nataraj ◽  
Sean Sanford ◽  
Mingxiao Liu ◽  
Noam Y. Harel
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Christophe Z Martin ◽  
Philippe Lapierre ◽  
Simon Haché ◽  
Diderot Lucien ◽  
Andrea M Green

Studies of reach control with the body stationary have shown that proprioceptive and visual feedback signals contributing to rapid corrections during reaching are processed by neural circuits that incorporate knowledge about the physical properties of the limb (an "internal model"). However, among the most common spatial and mechanical perturbations to the limb are those caused by our body's own motion, suggesting that processing of vestibular signals for online reach control may reflect a similar level of sophistication. We investigated this hypothesis using galvanic vestibular stimulation (GVS) to selectively activate the vestibular sensors, simulating body rotation, as human subjects reached to remembered targets in different directions (forward, leftward, rightward). If vestibular signals contribute to purely kinematic/spatial corrections for body motion, GVS should evoke reach trajectory deviations of similar size in all directions. In contrast, biomechanical modeling predicts that if vestibular processing for online reach control takes into account knowledge of the physical properties of the limb and the forces applied on it by body motion, then GVS should evoke trajectory deviations that are significantly larger during forward and leftward reaches as compared to rightward reaches. When GVS was applied during reaching, the observed deviations were on average consistent with this prediction. In contrast, when GVS was instead applied before reaching, evoked deviations were similar across directions, as predicted for a purely spatial correction mechanism. These results suggest that vestibular signals, like proprioceptive and visual feedback, are processed for online reach control via sophisticated neural mechanisms that incorporate knowledge of limb biomechanics.


Automatica ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 107 ◽  
pp. 264-271 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuhu Wu ◽  
Weiguo Xia ◽  
Ming Cao ◽  
Xi-Ming Sun

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 319-328 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jill Campbell Stewart ◽  
Rebecca Lewthwaite ◽  
Janelle Rocktashel ◽  
Carolee J. Winstein

Background: Persistent deficits in arm function are common after stroke. An improved understanding of the factors that contribute to the performance of skilled arm movements is needed. One such factor may be self-efficacy (SE). Objective: To determine the level of SE for skilled, goal-directed reach actions in individuals with mild motor impairment after stroke and whether SE for reach performance correlated with actual reach performance. Methods: A total of 20 individuals with chronic stroke (months poststroke: mean 58.1 ± 38.8) and mild motor impairment (upper-extremity Fugl-Meyer [FM] motor score: mean 53.2, range 39 to 66) and 6 age-matched controls reached to targets presented in 2 directions (ipsilateral, contralateral). Prior to each block (24 reach trials), individuals rated their confidence on reaching to targets accurately and quickly on a scale that ranged from 0 ( not very confident) to 10 ( very confident). Results: Overall reach performance was slower and less accurate in the more-affected arm compared with both the less-affected arm and controls. SE for both reach speed and reach accuracy was lower for the more-affected arm compared with the less-affected arm. For reaches with the more-affected arm, SE for reach speed and age significantly predicted movement time to ipsilateral targets ( R2 = 0.352), whereas SE for reach accuracy and FM motor score significantly predicted end point error to contralateral targets ( R2 = 0.291). Conclusions: SE relates to measures of reach control and may serve as a target for interventions to improve proximal arm control after stroke.


2019 ◽  
Vol 52 (16) ◽  
pp. 72-77
Author(s):  
S. Kerz ◽  
M. Appel ◽  
U. Konigorski

Author(s):  
Melkior Ornik ◽  
Mateus S. Moura ◽  
Alexander Peplowski ◽  
Mireille E. Broucke

Automatica ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 89 ◽  
pp. 201-211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melkior Ornik ◽  
Mireille E. Broucke

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document