Literature DB >> 26192097

Task-dependent changes of corticospinal excitability during observation and motor imagery of balance tasks.

A Mouthon1, J Ruffieux2, M Wälchli2, M Keller2, W Taube2.   

Abstract

Non-physical balance training has demonstrated to be efficient to improve postural control in young people. However, little is known about the potential to increase corticospinal excitability by mental simulation in lower leg muscles. Mental simulation of isolated, voluntary contractions of limb muscles increase corticospinal excitability but more automated tasks like walking seem to have no or only minor effects on motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) evoked by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). This may be related to the way of performing the mental simulation or the task itself. Therefore, the present study aimed to clarify how corticospinal excitability is modulated during AO+MI, MI and action observation (AO) of balance tasks. For this purpose, MEPs and H-reflexes were elicited during three different mental simulations (a) AO+MI, (b) MI and (c) passive AO. For each condition, two balance tasks were evaluated: (1) quiet upright stance (static) and (2) compensating a medio-lateral perturbation while standing on a free-swinging platform (dynamic). AO+MI resulted in the largest facilitation of MEPs followed by MI and passive AO. MEP facilitation was significantly larger in the dynamic perturbation than in the static standing task. Interestingly, passive observation resulted in hardly any facilitation independent of the task. H-reflex amplitudes were not modulated. The current results demonstrate that corticospinal excitability during mental simulation of balance tasks is influenced by both the type of mental simulation and the task difficulty. As H-reflexes and background EMG were not modulated, it may be argued that changes in excitability of the primary motor cortex were responsible for the MEP modulation. From a functional point of view, our findings suggest best training/rehabilitation effects when combining MI with AO during challenging postural tasks.
Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  action observation; balance tasks; motor imagery; postural control; transcranial magnetic stimulation

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26192097     DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2015.07.031

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


  23 in total

1.  Mental steps: Differential activation of internal pacemakers in motor imagery and in mental imitation of gait.

Authors:  Lucia Maria Sacheli; Laura Zapparoli; Carlo De Santis; Matteo Preti; Catia Pelosi; Nicola Ursino; Alberto Zerbi; Giuseppe Banfi; Eraldo Paulesu
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2017-07-21       Impact factor: 5.038

2.  Spinal plasticity with motor imagery practice.

Authors:  Sidney Grosprêtre; Florent Lebon; Charalambos Papaxanthis; Alain Martin
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2018-12-05       Impact factor: 5.182

3.  Analysis of mirror neuron system activation during action observation alone and action observation with motor imagery tasks.

Authors:  Bülent Cengiz; Doğa Vurallı; Murat Zinnuroğlu; Gözde Bayer; Hassan Golmohammadzadeh; Zafer Günendi; Ali Emre Turgut; Bülent İrfanoğlu; Kutluk Bilge Arıkan
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2017-12-11       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Neural mechanism of selective finger movement independent of synergistic movement.

Authors:  Toshiyuki Aoyama; Fuminari Kaneko; Yukari Ohashi; Yutaka Kohno
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2019-11-18       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Influence of combined action observation and motor imagery of walking on lower limb reflex modulation in patients after stroke-preliminary results.

Authors:  Frank Behrendt; Monika Le-Minh; Corina Schuster-Amft
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2022-05-13

6.  Characterizing the corticomotor connectivity of the bilateral ankle muscles during rest and isometric contraction in healthy adults.

Authors:  Charalambos C Charalambous; Jesse C Dean; DeAnna L Adkins; Colleen A Hanlon; Mark G Bowden
Journal:  J Electromyogr Kinesiol       Date:  2018-04-24       Impact factor: 2.368

7.  Does sonification of action simulation training impact corticospinal excitability and audiomotor plasticity?

Authors:  Fabio Castro; Ladan Osman; Giovanni Di Pino; Aleksandra Vuckovic; Alexander Nowicky; Daniel Bishop
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2021-03-08       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Effects of action observation and motor imagery of walking on the corticospinal and spinal motoneuron excitability and motor imagery ability in healthy participants.

Authors:  Naotsugu Kaneko; Atsushi Sasaki; Hikaru Yokoyama; Yohei Masugi; Kimitaka Nakazawa
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-04-18       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Viewing Instructions Accompanying Action Observation Modulate Corticospinal Excitability.

Authors:  David J Wright; Sheree A McCormick; Jacqueline Williams; Paul S Holmes
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2016-02-01       Impact factor: 3.169

Review 10.  Motor Imagery during Action Observation: A Brief Review of Evidence, Theory and Future Research Opportunities.

Authors:  Daniel L Eaves; Martin Riach; Paul S Holmes; David J Wright
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2016-11-21       Impact factor: 4.677

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.