Biomedical subjects

R L Sainburg

Publications and source records attributed to R L Sainburg.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2000

Differences in control of limb dynamics during dominant and nondominant arm reaching.

This study compares the coordination patterns employed for the left and right arms during rapid targeted reaching movements. Six right-handed subjects reached to each of three targets, designed to elicit progressively greater amplitude interaction torques at the elbow joint. All targets required the same elbow excursion (20 degrees ), but different shoulder excursions (5, 10, and 15 degrees, respectively). Movements were restricted to the shoulder and elbow and supported on a horizontal plane by a frictionless air-jet system. Subjects received visual feedback only of the final hand position with respect to the start and target locations. For motivation, points were awarded based on final position accuracy for movements completed within an interval of 400-600 ms. For all subjects, the right and left hands showed a similar time course of improvement in final position accuracy over repeated trials. After task adaptation, final position accuracy was similar for both hands; however, the hand trajectories and joint coordination patterns during the movements were systematically different. Right hand paths showed medial to lateral curvatures that were consistent in magnitude for all target directions, whereas the left hand paths had lateral to medial curvatures that increased in magnitude across the three target directions. Inverse dynamic analysis revealed substantial differences in the coordination of muscle and intersegmental torques for the left and right arms. Although left elbow muscle torque contributed largely to elbow acceleration, right arm coordination was characterized by a proximal control strategy, in which movement of both joints was primarily driven by the effects of shoulder muscles. In addition, right hand path direction changes were independent of elbow interaction torque impulse, indicating skillful coordination of muscle actions with intersegmental dynamics. In contrast, left hand path direction changes varied directly with elbow interaction torque impulse. These findings strongly suggest that distinct neural control mechanisms are employed for dominant and non dominant arm movements. However, whether interlimb differences in neural strategies are a consequence of asymmetric use of the two arms, or vice versa, is not yet understood. The implications for neural organization of voluntary movement control are discussed.

Adult↗

PubMed1999

Intersegmental dynamics are controlled by sequential anticipatory, error correction, and postural mechanisms.

The purpose of this study is to examine the mechanisms underlying control of intersegmental dynamics during reaching movements. Two experiments were conducted to determine the relative contributions of anticipatory and somatosensory feedback mechanisms in controlling intersegmental dynamics and whether adaptation to novel intersegmental dynamics generalizes across a range of movement directions. The mechanisms used to control interaction torques were examined by altering the inertial load of the forearm. Movements were restricted to the shoulder and elbow and supported on a horizontal plane by a frictionless air-jet system. Subjects made rapid out-and-back movements over a target line presented on a computer screen. The screen cursor disappeared at movement onset, and hand paths were displayed after each movement. After subjects adapted to a novel inertial configuration, the position of an attached mass was changed on pseudorandom trials. During these "surprise" trials, movements were initiated with the torque patterns appropriate to the previously learned inertial condition. As a result, characteristic errors in initial movement direction were predicted by an open-looped forward simulation. After these errors occurred, feedback mediated changes in torque emerged that, surprisingly, further decreased the accuracy of movement reversals. Nevertheless at the end of movement, the hand consistently returned to the starting position. It is plausible that the final position was determined completely by feedback-mediated changes in torque. In a second experiment, adaptation to a novel inertial load during movements made in a single direction showed limited transfer across a range of directions. These findings support and extend those of previous reports, which indicated combined anticipatory and postural mechanisms to coordinate rapid reaching movements. The current results indicate a three-stage control system that sequentially links anticipatory, error correction, and postural mechanisms to control intersegmental dynamics. Our results, showing limited generalization across directions, are consistent with previous reports examining adaptation to externally applied forces and extend those findings to indicate that the nervous system uses sensory information to recalibrate internal representations of the musculoskeletal apparatus itself.

Adaptation, Physiological↗

PubMed1995

Control of limb dynamics in normal subjects and patients without proprioception.

1. We recently showed that patients lacking proprioceptive input from their limbs have particular difficulty performing multijoint movements. In a pantomimed slicing gesture requiring sharp reversals in hand path direction, patients showed large hand path distortions at movement reversals because of failure to coordinate the timing of the separate reversals at the shoulder and elbow joints. We hypothesized that these reversal errors resulted from uncompensated effects of inertial interactions produced by changes in shoulder joint acceleration that were transferred to the elbow. We now test this hypothesis and examine the role of proprioceptive input by comparing the motor performance of five normal subjects with that of two patients with large-fiber sensory neuropathy. 2. Subjects were to trace each of six template lines presented randomly on a computer screen by straight overlapping out-and-back movements of the hand on a digitizing tablet. The lines originated from a common starting position but were in different directions and had different lengths. Directions and lengths were adjusted so that tracing movements would all require the same elbow excursion, whereas shoulder excursion would vary. The effects of varying interaction torques on elbow kinematics were then studied. The subject's dominant arm was supported in the horizontal plane by a low-inertia brace equipped with ball bearing joints and potentiometers under the elbow and shoulder. Hand position was monitored by a magnetic pen attached to the brace 1 cm above a digitizing tablet and could be displayed as a screen cursor. Vision of the subject's arm was blocked and the screen cursor was blanked at movement onset to prevent visual feedback during movement. Elbow joint torques were calculated from joint angle recordings and compared with electromyographic recordings of elbow joint musculature. 3. In control subjects, outward and inward paths were straight and overlapped the template lines regardless of their direction. As prescribed by the task, elbow kinematics remained the same across movement directions, whereas interaction torques varied substantially. The timing of the onsets of biceps activity and the offsets of triceps activity during elbow flexion varied systematically with direction-dependent changes in interaction torques. Controls exploited or dampened these interaction torques as needed to meet the kinematic demands of the task. 4. In contrast, the patients made characteristic errors at movement reversals that increased systematically across movement directions. These reversal errors resulted from improper timing of elbow and shoulder joint reversals.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Adult↗

PubMed1993

Loss of proprioception produces deficits in interjoint coordination.

1. We analyzed the performance of a simple pantomimed gesture in 2 patients with large-fiber sensory neuropathy and 11 control subjects to determine how proprioceptive deafferentation disrupts unconstrained multijoint movements. Both patients had near-total loss of joint position, vibration, and discriminative touch sensation in the upper extremities. Muscle strength remained intact. 2. Subjects performed a gesture similar to slicing a loaf of bread. In this gesture, the hand first moves outward from the body, reverses direction sharply, and then moves back toward the body. Accurate performance requires precise coordination between the shoulder and elbow joints during movement reversals. Movements were performed under two conditions: with eyes open and with eyes closed. Three dimensional shoulder, elbow, wrist, and hand trajectories were recorded on a WATSMART system. 3. When control subjects performed the gesture with their eyes closed, their wrist trajectories were relatively straight and individual cycles of motion were planar. Movements reversed direction sharply, such that outward and inward portions of the wrist path were closely aligned. Corresponding to this spatial profile, the reversals in movement direction at the shoulder joint, from flexion to extension, and at the elbow joint, from extension to flexion, were synchronous. 4. In contrast, when deafferented patients performed the gesture with their eyes closed, their wrist trajectories were highly curved and individual cycles were severely nonplanar. The wrist paths showed a characteristic anomaly during the reversal in movement direction, when elbow joint movement became transiently locked. Correspondingly, the movement reversals at the shoulder and elbow joints were severely temporally decoupled. 5. When patients were able to view their limbs during performance of this gesture there was significant improvement in the linearity and planarity of movements. However, the patients remained unable to synchronize the movements at the shoulder and elbow joints to produce spatially precise wrist paths. 6. We conclude that loss of proprioception disrupts interjoint coordination and discuss the hypothesis that this interjoint coordination deficit results from a failure to control the interaction forces that arise between limb segments during multijoint movements.

Adult↗