Vestibular system may provide equivalent motor actions regardless of the number of body segments involved in the task

Vestibular motor control

The vestibular system is an essential sensory system that generates motor reflexes that are crucial for our daily activities, including stabilizing the visual axis of gaze and maintaining head and body posture. In addition, the vestibular system provides us with our sense of movement and orientation relative to space and serves a vital role in ensuring accurate voluntary behaviors. Neurophysiological studies have provided fundamental insights into the functional circuitry of vestibular motor pathways. A unique feature of the vestibular system compared to other sensory systems is that the same central neurons that receive direct input from the afferents of the vestibular component of the 8th nerve can also directly project to motor centers that control vital vestibular motor reflexes. In turn, these reflexes ensure stabilize gaze and the maintenance of posture during everyday activities. For instance, a direct three-neuron pathway mediates the vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR) pathway to provide stable gaze. Furthermore, recent studies have advanced our understanding of the computations performed by the cerebellum and cortex required for motor learning, compensation, and voluntary movement and navigation. Together, these findings have provided new insights into how the brain ensures accurate self-movement during our everyday activities and have also advanced our knowledge of the neurobiological mechanisms underlying disorders of vestibular processing.

Representation of Body Orientation in Vestibular-Defective Patients Before and After Unilateral Vestibular Loss

Introduction: The unilateral vestibular syndrome results in postural, oculomotor, perceptive, and cognitive symptoms. This study was designed to investigate the role of vestibular signals in body orientation representation, which remains poorly considered in vestibular patients. Methods: The subjective straight ahead (SSA) was investigated using a method disentangling translation and rotation components of error. Participants were required to align a rod with their body midline in the horizontal plane. Patients with right vestibular neurotomy (RVN; n =8) or left vestibular neurotomy (LVN; n = 13) or vestibular schwannoma resection were compared with 12 healthy controls. Patients were tested the day before surgery and during the recovery period, 7 days and 2 months after the surgery. Results: Before and after unilateral vestibular neurotomy, i.e., in the chronic phases, patients showed a rightward translation bias of their SSA, without rotation bias, whatever the side of the vestibular loss. However, the data show that the lower the translation error before neurotomy, the greater its increase 2 months after a total unilateral vestibular loss, therefore leading to a rightward translation of similar amplitude in the two groups of patients. In the early phase after surgery, SSA moved toward the operated side both in translation and in rotation, as typically found for biases occurring after unilateral vestibular loss, such as the subjective visual vertical (SVV) bias. Discussion and Conclusion: This study gives the first description of the immediate consequences and of the recovery time course of body orientation representation after a complete unilateral vestibular loss. The overall evolution differed according to the side of the lesion with more extensive changes over time before and after left vestibular loss. It is noteworthy that representational disturbances of self-orientation were highly unusual in the chronic stage after vestibular loss and similar to those reported after hemispheric lesions causing spatial neglect, while classical ipsilesional biases were reported in the acute stage. This study strongly supports the notion that the vestibular system plays a major role in body representation processes and more broadly in spatial cognition. From a clinical point of view, SSA appeared to be a reliable indicator for the presence of a vestibular disorder.

Age-related changes in upper limb coordination in a complex reaching task

When reaching to targets within arm's reach, intentional trunk motion must be neutralized by compensatory motion of the upper limb (UL). Advanced age has been associated with deterioration in the coordination of multi-joint UL movements. In the current study, we looked to determine if older adults also have difficulties modifying their UL movements (i.e., coordination between the shoulder and elbow joints), during a complex reaching task when trunk motion is manipulated. Two groups of healthy participants were recruited: 18 young (mean age = 24.28 ± 2.89 years old) and 18 older (mean age = 72.11 ± 2.39 years old) adults. Participants reached to a target with their eyes closed, while simultaneously moving the trunk forward. In 40% of trials, the trunk motion was unexpectedly blocked. Participants performed the task with both their dominant and non-dominant arms, and at a preferred and fast speed. All participants were able to coordinate motion at the elbow and shoulder joints in a similar manner and modify this coordination in accordance with motion at the trunk, regardless of the hand used or speed of movement. Specifically, in reaches that involved forward trunk motion (free-trunk trials), all participants demonstrated increased elbow flexion (i.e., less elbow extension) compared to blocked-trunk trials. In contrast, when trunk motion was blocked (blocked-trunk trials), all reaching movements were accompanied by increased shoulder horizontal adduction. While coordination of UL joints was similar across older and young adults, the extent of changes at the elbow and shoulder was smaller and less consistent in older adults compared to young participants, especially when trunk motion was involved. These results suggest that older adults can coordinate their UL movements based on task requirements, but that their performance is not as consistent as young adults.

Vestibular contributions to online reach execution are processed via mechanisms with knowledge about limb biomechanics

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 with 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.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Studies examining proprioceptive and visual contributions to rapid corrections for externally applied mechanical and spatial perturbations during reaching have provided evidence for flexible processing of sensory feedback that accounts for musculoskeletal system dynamics. Notably, however, such perturbations commonly arise from our body's own motion. In line with this, we provide compelling evidence that, similar to proprioceptive and visual signals, vestibular signals are processed for online reach control via sophisticated mechanisms that incorporate knowledge of limb biomechanics.

Motor-Equivalent Intersegmental Coordination Is Impaired in Chronic Stroke

Background. Kinematic abundance permits using different movement patterns for task completion. Individuals poststroke may take advantage of abundance by using compensatory trunk displacement to overcome upper limb (UL) movement deficits. However, movement adaptation in tasks requiring specific intersegment coordination may remain limited. Objective. We tested movement adaptation in both arms of individuals with chronic stroke (n = 16) and nondominant arms of controls (n = 12) using 2 no-vision reaching tasks involving trunk movement (40 trials/arm). Methods. In the "stationary hand task" (SHT), subjects maintained the hand motionless over a target while leaning the trunk forward. In the "reaching hand task" (RHT), subjects reached to the target while leaning forward. For both tasks, trunk movement was unexpectedly blocked in 40% of trials to assess the influence of trunk movement on adaptive arm positioning or reaching. UL sensorimotor impairment, activity, and sitting balance were assessed in the stroke group. The primary outcome measure for SHT was gain (g), defined as the extent to which trunk displacement contributing to hand motion was offset by appropriate changes in UL movements (g = 1: complete compensation) and endpoint deviation for RHT. Results. Individuals poststroke had lower gains and greater endpoint deviation using the more-affected compared with less-affected UL and controls. Those with less sensorimotor impairment, greater activity levels, and better sitting balance had higher gains and smaller endpoint deviations. Lower gains were associated with diminished UL adaptability. Conclusions. Tests of condition-specific adaptability of interjoint coordination may be used to measure UL adaptability and changes in adaptability with treatment.

Referent control and motor equivalence of reaching from standing

Motor actions may result from central changes in the referent body configuration, defined as the body posture at which muscles begin to be activated or deactivated. The actual body configuration deviates from the referent configuration, particularly because of body inertia and environmental forces. Within these constraints, the system tends to minimize the difference between these configurations. For pointing movement, this strategy can be expressed as the tendency to minimize the difference between the referent trajectory (R_T) and actual trajectory (Q_T) of the effector (hand). This process may underlie motor equivalent behavior that maintains the pointing trajectory regardless of the number of body segments involved. We tested the hypothesis that the minimization process is used to produce pointing in standing subjects. With eyes closed, 10 subjects reached from a standing position to a remembered target located beyond arm length. In randomly chosen trials, hip flexion was unexpectedly prevented, forcing subjects to take a step during pointing to prevent falling. The task was repeated when subjects were instructed to intentionally take a step during pointing. In most cases, reaching accuracy and trajectory curvature were preserved due to adaptive condition-specific changes in interjoint coordination. Results suggest that referent control and the minimization process associated with it may underlie motor equivalence in pointing.

NEW & NOTEWORTHY

Motor actions may result from minimization of the deflection of the actual body configuration from the centrally specified referent body configuration, in the limits of neuromuscular and environmental constraints. The minimization process may maintain reaching trajectory and accuracy regardless of the number of body segments involved (motor equivalence), as confirmed in this study of reaching from standing in young healthy individuals. Results suggest that the referent control process may underlie motor equivalence in reaching.

Visual and proprioceptive contributions to postural control of upright stance in unilateral vestibulopathy

Preserving upright stance requires central integration of the sensory systems and appropriate motor output from the neuromuscular system to keep the centre of pressure (COP) within the base of support. Unilateral peripheral vestibular disorder (UPVD) causes diminished stance stability. The aim of this study was to determine the limits of stability and to examine the contribution of multiple sensory systems to upright standing in UPVD patients and healthy subjects. We hypothesized that closure of the eyes and Achilles tendon vibration during upright stance will augment the postural sway in UPVD patients more than in healthy subjects. Seventeen UPVD patients and 17 healthy subjects performed six tasks on a force plate: forwards and backwards leaning, to determine limits of stability, and upright standing with and without Achilles tendon vibration, each with eyes open and closed (with blackout glasses). The COP displacement of the patients was significantly greater in the vibration tasks than the controls and came closer to the posterior base of support boundary than the controls in all tasks. Achilles tendon vibration led to a distinctly more backward sway in both subject groups. Five of the patients could not complete the eyes closed with vibration task. Due to the greater reduction in stance stability when the proprioceptive, compared with the visual, sensory system was disturbed, we suggest that proprioception may be more important for maintaining upright stance than vision. UPVD patients, in particular, showed more difficulty in controlling postural stability in the posterior direction with visual and proprioceptive sensory disturbance.

Composite body movements modulate numerical cognition: evidence from the motion-numerical compatibility effect

A recent hierarchical model of numerical processing, initiated by Fischer and Brugger (2011) and Fischer (2012), suggested that situated factors, such as different body postures and body movements, can influence the magnitude representation and bias numerical processing. Indeed, Loetscher et al. (2008) found that participants’ behavior in a random number generation task was biased by head rotations. More small numbers were reported after leftward than rightward head turns, i.e., a motion-numerical compatibility effect. Here, by carrying out two experiments, we explored whether similar motion-numerical compatibility effects exist for movements of other important body components, e.g., arms, and for composite body movements as well, which are basis for complex human activities in many ecologically meaningful situations. In Experiment 1, a motion-numerical compatibility effect was observed for lateral rotations of two body components, i.e., the head and arms. Relatively large numbers were reported after making rightward compared to leftward movements for both lateral head and arm turns. The motion-numerical compatibility effect was observed again in Experiment 2 when participants were asked to perform composite body movements of congruent movement directions, e.g., simultaneous head left turns and arm left turns. However, it disappeared when the movement directions were incongruent, e.g., simultaneous head left turns and arm right turns. Taken together, our results extended Loetscher et al.’s (2008) finding by demonstrating that their effect is effector-general and exists for arm movements. Moreover, our study reveals for the first time that the impact of spatial information on numerical processing induced by each of the two sensorimotor-based situated factors, e.g., a lateral head turn and a lateral arm turn, can cancel each other out.

Deficient recovery response and adaptive feedback potential in dynamic gait stability in unilateral peripheral vestibular disorder patients

Unilateral peripheral vestibular disorder (UPVD) causes deficient locomotor responses to novel environments due to a lack of accurate vestibular sensory information, increasing fall risk. This study aimed to examine recovery response (stability recovery actions) and adaptive feedback potential in dynamic stability of UPVD-patients and healthy control subjects during perturbed walking. 17 UPVD-patients (>6 months since onset) and 17 matched healthy control participants walked on a treadmill and were subjected to eight unexpected perturbations during the swing phase of the right leg. For each perturbation, the margin of stability (MS; state of body's centre of mass in relation to the base of support), was determined at touchdown of the perturbed leg and during the following six recovery steps. The first perturbation caused a reduced MS at touchdown for the perturbed leg compared to baseline, indicating an unstable position, with controls requiring five recovery steps to return to MS baseline and UPVD-patients not returning to baseline level within the analyzed six recovery steps. By the eighth perturbation, control subjects needed two steps, and UPVD-patients required three recovery steps, both thereby improving their recovery response with practice. However, MS at touchdown of the perturbed leg increased only for the controls after repeated perturbations, indicating adaptive feedback-driven locomotor improvements for the controls, but not for the UPVD-patients. We concluded that UPVD-patients have a diminished ability to control dynamic gait stability during unexpected perturbations, increasing their fall risk, and that vestibular dysfunction may inhibit the neuromotor system adapting the reactive motor response to perturbations.

Arm-trunk coordination for beyond-the-reach movements in adults with stroke

BACKGROUND

By involving additional degrees of freedom, the nervous system may preserve hand trajectories when making pointing movements with or without trunk displacement. Previous studies indicate that the potential contribution of trunk movement to hand displacement for movements made within arm reach is neutralized by appropriate compensatory shoulder and elbow rotations. For beyond-the-reach movements, compensatory coordination is attenuated after the hand peak velocity, allowing trunk movement to contribute to hand displacement.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate if the timing and spatial coordination of arm and trunk movements during beyond-the-reach movements is preserved in stroke.

METHODS

Eleven healthy control subjects and 11 individuals with mild-to-moderate chronic unilateral hemiparesis participated. Arm and trunk kinematics during 60 target reaches to an ipsilaterally placed target were recorded. In 30% of randomly chosen trials, trunk movement was unexpectedly prevented (blocked-trunk trials) by an electromagnetic device, resulting in divergence of the hand trajectory from that in free-trunk trials. Hand trajectories and elbow-shoulder interjoint coordination were compared between trials.

RESULTS

In stroke participants, hand trajectory divergence occurred at a shorter movement extent and interjoint coordination patterns diverged at a relatively greater distance compared to controls. Thus, arm movements in stroke participants only partially compensated trunk displacement resulting in the trunk movement contributing to arm movement earlier and to a larger extent during reaching.

CONCLUSION

Individuals with mild-to-moderate stroke have deficits in timing and spatial coordination of arm and trunk movements during different parts of a reaching movement. This deficit may be targeted in therapy to improve upper limb function.

Effects of underestimating the kinematics of trunk rotation on simultaneous reaching movements: predictions of a biomechanical model

Background

Rotation of the torso while reaching produces torques (e.g., Coriolis torque) that deviate the arm from its planned trajectory. To ensure an accurate reaching movement, the brain may take these perturbing torques into account during movement planning or, alternatively, it may correct hand trajectory during movement execution. Irrespective of the process selected, it is expected that an underestimation of trunk rotation would likely induce inaccurate shoulder and elbow torques, resulting in hand deviation. Nonetheless, it is still undetermined to what extent a small error in the perception of trunk rotations, translating into an inappropriate selection of motor commands, would affect reaching accuracy.

Methods

To investigate, we adapted a biomechanical model (J Neurophysiol 89: 276-289, 2003) to predict the consequences of underestimating trunk rotations on right hand reaching movements performed during either clockwise or counter clockwise torso rotations.

Results

The results revealed that regardless of the degree to which the torso rotation was underestimated, the amplitude of hand deviation was much larger for counter clockwise rotations than for clockwise rotations. This was attributed to the fact that the Coriolis and centripetal joint torques were acting in the same direction during counter clockwise rotation yet in opposite directions during clockwise rotations, effectively cancelling each other out.

Conclusions

These findings suggest that in order to anticipate and compensate for the interaction torques generated during torso rotation while reaching, the brain must have an accurate prediction of torso rotation kinematics. The present study proposes that when designing upper limb prostheses controllers, adding a sensor to monitor trunk kinematics may improve prostheses control and performance.

Internal models and neural computation in the vestibular system

The vestibular system is vital for motor control and spatial self-motion perception. Afferents from the otolith organs and the semicircular canals converge with optokinetic, somatosensory and motor-related signals in the vestibular nuclei, which are reciprocally interconnected with the vestibulocerebellar cortex and deep cerebellar nuclei. Here, we review the properties of the many cell types in the vestibular nuclei, as well as some fundamental computations implemented within this brainstem-cerebellar circuitry. These include the sensorimotor transformations for reflex generation, the neural computations for inertial motion estimation, the distinction between active and passive head movements, as well as the integration of vestibular and proprioceptive information for body motion estimation. A common theme in the solution to such computational problems is the concept of internal models and their neural implementation. Recent studies have shed new insights into important organizational principles that closely resemble those proposed for other sensorimotor systems, where their neural basis has often been more difficult to identify. As such, the vestibular system provides an excellent model to explore common neural processing strategies relevant both for reflexive and for goal-directed, voluntary movement as well as perception.

Insights into the control of arm movement during body motion as revealed by EMG analyses

Recent studies have revealed that vestibulomotor transformations contribute to maintain the hand stationary in space during trunk rotation. Here we tested whether these vestibulomotor transformations have the same latencies and whether they are subject to similar cognitive control than the visuomotor transformations during manual tracking of a visual target. We recorded hand displacement and shoulder-muscle activity in two tasks: a stabilization task in which subjects stabilized their hand during passive 30 degrees body rotations, and a tracking task in which subjects tracked with their finger a visual target as it moved 30 degrees around them. The EMG response times recorded in the stabilization task (approximately 165 ms) were twice as short as those observed for the tracking task (approximately 350 ms). Tested with the same paradigm, a deafferented subject showed EMG response times that closely matched those recorded in healthy subjects, thus, suggesting a vestibular origin of the arm movements. Providing advance information about the direction of the required arm movement reduced the response times in the tracking task (by approximately 115 ms) but had no significant effect in the stabilization task. Generally, when providing false information about movement direction in the tracking task, an EMG burst first appeared in the muscle moving the arm in the direction opposite to the actual target motion (i.e., in accord with the precueing). This behavior was rarely observed in the stabilization task. These results show that the sensorimotor transformations that move the arm relative to the trunk have shorter latencies when they originate from vestibular inputs than from visual information and that vestibulomotor transformations are more resistant to cognitive processes than visuomotor transformations.