Literature DB >> 22516013

Sensorimotor integration during stance: processing time of active or passive addition or withdrawal of visual or haptic information.

S Sozzi1, M-C Do, A Monti, M Schieppati.   

Abstract

Vision (V) and touch (T) help stabilize our standing body, but little is known on the time-interval necessary for the brain to process the sensory inflow (or its removal) and exploit the new information (or counteract its removal). We have estimated the latency of onset and the time-course of the changes in postural control mode following addition or withdrawal of sensory information and the effect of anticipation thereof. Ten subjects stood in tandem position. They wore LCD goggles that allowed or removed vision, or lightly touched (eyes-closed) with the index finger (haptic stimulation) a pad that could be suddenly lowered (passive task). In different sessions, sensory shifts were deliberately produced by opening (or closing) the eyes or touching the pad (or lifting the finger) (active task). We recorded eyelid movement and finger force (<1N), sway of center of foot pressure (CoP), electromyogram (EMG) of soleus, tibialis and peroneus muscle, bilaterally, and of extensor indicis. The latency of the CoP and EMG changes following the shifts were statistically estimated on the averaged traces of 50 repetitions per condition. Muscle activity and sway adaptively decreased in amplitude on adding stabilizing visual or haptic information. The time-interval from the sensory shift to decrease in EMG and sway was ∼0.5-2 s under both conditions. It was shorter for tibialis than peroneus or soleus and shorter for visual than haptic shift. CoP followed the tibialis by ∼0.2 s. Slightly shorter intervals were observed following active sensory shifts. Latencies of EMG and postural changes were the shortest on removal of both haptic and visual information. Subsequently, the time taken to reach the steady-state was ∼1-3 s under both active and passive tasks. A startle response at ∼100 ms could precede EMG changes. Reaction-time contractions in response to sensory shifts appeared at ∼200 ms, earlier than the adaptive changes. Changes in postural behavior require a finite amount of time from visual or haptic shift, much longer than reflexes or rapid voluntary responses, suggesting a time-consuming central integration process. This process is longer on addition than removal of haptic information, indicating a heavier computational load. These findings should be taken into account when considering problems of sensorimotor integration in elderly subjects or patients and when designing simulation models of human balance.
Copyright © 2012 IBRO. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22516013     DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2012.03.044

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuroscience        ISSN: 0306-4522            Impact factor:   3.590


  21 in total

1.  Processing time of addition or withdrawal of single or combined balance-stabilizing haptic and visual information.

Authors:  Jean-Louis Honeine; Oscar Crisafulli; Stefania Sozzi; Marco Schieppati
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2015-09-02       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  EEG frequency analysis of cortical brain activities induced by effect of light touch.

Authors:  Tomoya Ishigaki; Kozo Ueta; Ryota Imai; Shu Morioka
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-01-12       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Loss of balance during balance beam walking elicits a multifocal theta band electrocortical response.

Authors:  Amy R Sipp; Joseph T Gwin; Scott Makeig; Daniel P Ferris
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2013-08-07       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  Light touch modulates balance recovery following perturbation: from fast response to stance restabilization.

Authors:  Alessandra Rezende Martinelli; Daniel Boari Coelho; Fernando Henrique Magalhães; André Fabio Kohn; Luis Augusto Teixeira
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2015-02-03       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Body sway adaptation to addition but not withdrawal of stabilizing visual information is delayed by a concurrent cognitive task.

Authors:  Jean-Louis Honeine; Oscar Crisafulli; Marco Schieppati
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-11-30       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Sensory reweighting dynamics in human postural control.

Authors:  Lorenz Assländer; Robert J Peterka
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2014-02-05       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  Sensory reweighting dynamics following removal and addition of visual and proprioceptive cues.

Authors:  Lorenz Assländer; Robert J Peterka
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-04-13       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  Word-induced postural changes reflect a tight interaction between motor and lexico-semantic representations.

Authors:  Douglas M Shiller; Nicolas Bourguignon; Victor Frak; Tatjana Nazir; Geneviève Cadoret; Maxime Robert; Martin Lemay
Journal:  Neurosci Lett       Date:  2013-09-16       Impact factor: 3.046

9.  The effects of visual and haptic vertical stimulation on standing balance in stroke patients.

Authors:  Seok Ha Hong; Sun Im; Geun-Young Park
Journal:  Ann Rehabil Med       Date:  2013-12-23

10.  Visual conflict and cognitive load modify postural responses to vibrotactile noise.

Authors:  Emily A Keshner; Jill C Slaboda; Lois Lanaria Day; Kurosh Darvish
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2014-01-13       Impact factor: 4.262

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.