Proprioceptive deficits in inactive older adults are not reflected in fast targeted reaching movements
18
Citation
80
Reference
10
Related Paper
Citation Trend
Abstract:
During normal healthy ageing there is a decline in the ability to control simple movements, characterised by increased reaction times, movement durations and variability. There is also growing evidence of age-related proprioceptive loss which may contribute to these impairments. However, this relationship has not been studied in detail for the upper limb. We recruited 20 younger adults (YAs) and 31 older adults (OAs) who each performed 2 tasks on a 2D robotic manipulandum. The first assessed dynamic proprioceptive acuity using active, multi-joint movements constrained by the robot to a pre-defined path. Participants made perceptual judgements of the lateral position of the unseen arm. The second task required fast, accurate and discrete movements to the same targets in the absence of visual feedback of the hand, and without robotic intervention. We predicted that the variable proprioceptive error (uncertainty range) assessed in Task 1 would be increased in physically inactive OAs and would predict increased movement variability in Task 2. Instead we found that physically inactive OAs had larger systematic proprioceptive errors (bias) than YAs (t[33] = 2.8, p = 0.009), and neither proprioceptive uncertainty nor bias was related to motor performance in either age group (all regression model R2 ≤ 0.06). We suggest that previously reported estimates of proprioceptive decline with ageing may be exaggerated by task demands and that the extent of these deficits is unrelated to control of discrete, rapid movement. The relationship between dynamic proprioceptive acuity and movement control in other tasks with greater emphasis on online feedback is still unclear and warrants further investigation.Keywords:
Proprioception
Motor Control
Proprioception
Cite
Citations (21)
Current methods of measurement of proprioceptive function depend on the ability to detect passive movement (kinaesthesia) or the awareness of joint position (joint position sense, JPS). However, reports of proprioceptive function in healthy and pathological joints are quite variable, which may be due to the different methods used. We have compared the validity of several frequently used methods to quantify proprioception. Thirty healthy subjects aged between 24 and 72 years underwent five established tests of proprioception. Two tests were used for the measurement of kinaesthesia (KT1 and KT2). Three tests were used for the measurement of JPS, a passive reproduction test (JPS1), a relative reproduction test (JPS2) and a visual estimation test (JPS3). There was no correlation between the tests for kinaesthesia and JPS or between the different JPS tests. There was, however, a significant correlation between the tests for kinaesthesia (r = 0.86). We conclude therefore that a subject with a given result in one test will not automatically obtain a similar result in another test for proprioception. Since they describe different functional proprioceptive attributes, proprioceptive ability cannot be inferred from independent tests of either kinaesthesia or JPS.
Proprioception
Position (finance)
Cite
Citations (56)
Proprioception
Motor Control
Cite
Citations (63)
The authors report an experimental study of a perceptual hypothesis of subjects (ages 17 to 25 years) on a drawing task (drawing a still life). It is assumed that perception can be studied as a process of solving a direct-sensory task where the solution to the task requires removing uncertainty from the situation. From subjects’ solution of the drawing task, three classes of hypothesis were determined, and each divided into three types depending on the number of components (a one, two, or multicomponent hypothesis). Sixteen strategies were differentiated in completing the perceptual task.
Cite
Citations (0)
Proprioception
Cite
Citations (16)
At least since the advent of motor psychophysics in the 1890s, there has been considerable interest in the role of proprioceptive information in motor control, and whether different classes of movements use such information in fundamentally distinct ways. In his classic 1899 monograph, Woodworm had some difficulty distinguishing between the contribution of exteroceptive and proprioceptive inputs to motor control. He noted that "any sense whatever may conceivably serve as the sensory basis for controlling the extent of a movement." However, it is apparent from Woodworm's discussions that muscular sense is one of the more important senses that humans use for movement control. Despite a wealth of clinical and experimental observations indicating the general significance of proprioceptors (i.e., muscle spindles, Golgi tendon organs, and tactile afferents) in motor performance, there remains some doubt about the exact contribution of these receptors to movement. That is, do certain classes of afferents contribute special regulation to certain movements?KeywordsMotor ControlProprioceptive InputGolgi Tendon OrganMotor Unit DischargeMotor Unit Discharge RateThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Proprioception
Muscle spindle
Motor Control
Cite
Citations (1)
Parkinson's disease (PD) is a neurodegenerative disorder that leads to a progressive decline in motor function. Growing evidence indicates that PD patients also experience an array of sensory problems that negatively impact motor function. This is especially true for proprioceptive deficits, which profoundly degrade motor performance. This review specifically address the relation between proprioception and motor impairments in PD. It is structured around 4 themes: (a) It examines whether the sensitivity of kinaesthetic perception, which is based on proprioceptive inputs, is actually altered in PD. (b) It discusses whether failed processes of proprioceptive-motor integration are central to the motor problems in PD. (c) It presents recent findings focusing on the link between the proprioception and the balance problems in PD. And (d) it discusses the current state of knowledge of how levodopa medication and deep brain stimulation affect proprioceptive and motor function in PD. The authors conclude that a failure to evaluate and to map proprioceptive information onto voluntary and reflexive motor commands is an integral part of the observed motor symptoms in PD.
Proprioception
Motor Control
Cite
Citations (302)
We explored the effects of random whole-body vibration on leg proprioception in Parkinson's disease (PD). In earlier studies it was found that this treatment leads to improved postural control in these patients. Thus, one could speculate that these effects result from modified proprioceptive capabilities. Twenty-eight PD patients were subdivided in one experimental and one control group. Proprioceptive performance was analyzed using a tracking task basing on knee extension and flexion movements. Treatment consisted of 5 series of random whole-body vibration taking 60 seconds each. Control subjects had a rest period instead. Prominent over- and undershooting errors were found in both groups representing proprioceptive impairments. No significant differences became evident, however, either between pre- and post-tests or between experimental and control group. One might therefore conclude that spontaneous improvements in postural control are not directly connected with proprioceptive changes. Nevertheless, one also should keep in mind the general aspects and difficulties of analyzing proprioception.
Proprioception
Motor Control
Cite
Citations (56)
During normal healthy ageing there is a decline in the ability to control simple movements, characterised by increased reaction times, movement durations and variability. There is also growing evidence of age-related proprioceptive loss which may contribute to these impairments. However, this relationship has not been studied in detail for the upper limb. We recruited 20 younger adults (YAs) and 31 older adults (OAs) who each performed 2 tasks on a 2D robotic manipulandum. The first assessed dynamic proprioceptive acuity using active, multi-joint movements constrained by the robot to a pre-defined path. Participants made perceptual judgements of the lateral position of the unseen arm. The second task required fast, accurate and discrete movements to the same targets in the absence of visual feedback of the hand, and without robotic intervention. We predicted that the variable proprioceptive error (uncertainty range) assessed in Task 1 would be increased in physically inactive OAs and would predict increased movement variability in Task 2. Instead we found that physically inactive OAs had larger systematic proprioceptive errors (bias) than YAs (t[33] = 2.8, p = 0.009), and neither proprioceptive uncertainty nor bias was related to motor performance in either age group (all regression model R2 ≤ 0.06). We suggest that previously reported estimates of proprioceptive decline with ageing may be exaggerated by task demands and that the extent of these deficits is unrelated to control of discrete, rapid movement. The relationship between dynamic proprioceptive acuity and movement control in other tasks with greater emphasis on online feedback is still unclear and warrants further investigation.
Proprioception
Motor Control
Cite
Citations (18)