Dataset Information

Neuroplasticity Caused by Peripheral Proprioceptive Deficits.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Proprioceptive feedback is crucial for motor control and stabilization of the shoulder joint in everyday life and sports. Shoulder dislocation causes anatomical and proprioceptive feedback damage that contributes to subsequent dislocations. Previous recurrent anterior shoulder instability (RSI) studies did not investigate functional neuroplasticity related to proprioception of the injured shoulder. Thus, we aimed to study the differences in neuroplasticity related to motor control between patients with RSI and healthy individuals, using functional magnetic resonance imaging, and assess the effects of peripheral proprioceptive deficits due to RSI on CNS activity.

Methods

Using passive shoulder motion and voluntary shoulder muscles contraction tasks, we compared the CNS correlates of proprioceptive activity between patients having RSI (n = 13) and healthy controls (n = 12) to clarify RSI pathophysiology and the effects of RSI-related peripheral proprioceptive deficits on CNS activity.

Results

Decreased proprioception-related brain activity indicated a deficient passive proprioception in patients with RSI (P < 0.05 family-wise error, cluster level). Proprioceptive afferent-related right cerebellar activity significantly negatively correlated with the extent of shoulder damage (P = 0.001, r = -0.79). Functional magnetic resonance imaging demonstrated abnormal motor control in the CNS during voluntary shoulder muscles contraction.

Conclusion

Our integrated analysis of peripheral anatomical information and brain activity during motion tasks can be used to investigate other orthopedic diseases.

SUBMITTER: Shitara H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8677609 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDiabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) is a notable microvascular complication of DM, affecting 16%-66% globally. DPN often leads to proprioceptive deficits in the lower limbs (LL), leading to impaired functional performance. However, evidence supporting proprioceptive rehabilitation programs (PRP) for DPN remains scarce.AimsThis pilot study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a novel 12-week PRP on LL static and dynamic proprioception and shed light on the potential benefits of PRP for DPN population.MethodsRandomized Controlled Trail was conducted among 30 DPN patients (age 53.25±7.72 years, BMI 24.01±1.41 and DM duration 9.48±6.45 years), randomly allocated to intervention (n = 15) or control (n = 15) groups. The intervention group received PRP 3 times/week for 12 weeks. The control group received no exercise. Both groups received regular diabetic care. Static and dynamic proprioception of both LL were assessed at baseline, 6 weeks and 12 weeks. Position-reposition test was used to assess ankle joint position sense by obtaining difference between target and reproduced angles. Error in detecting knee angle and speed were obtained by performing Lower Limb Matching and Sense of Movement tests respectively to assess dynamic proprioception.ResultsTwo-way ANOVA and paired comparisons revealed, no significant improvement in proprioceptive deficits at 6 weeks (p>0.05), but significant improvement was achieved at 12-weeks (p<0.05) in the intervention group. Mean errors in Pposition re-position(R:p<0.001, L;p<0.001) and Lower limb matching (R:p<0.001, L;p<0.001) tests reduced by 5° and 10° respectively, indicating a70% improvement in the intervention group. Error of detecting speed reduced only on right side by 0.041ms-1 accounting for a 42% improvement. No improvements were observed in the control group.ConclusionsNovel 12-week PRP may yield a significant reduction in LL proprioceptive deficits among DPN patients. Future RCTs with larger samples should compare the effectiveness of this PRP compared with conventional rehabilitation programs.

Project description:Introduction: Proprioceptive impairment is a common symptom after stroke. Clarifying how proprioception correlates with motor function after stroke may be helpful in optimizing proprioception-augmented movement training. Previous studies have shown inconsistent findings. A meta-analysis is an optimal method to explore the correlation and identify the factors contributing to these inconsistencies. Objective: To explore the correlation between proprioception and motor function after stroke through a meta-analysis, taking into account characteristics of the measurements used in these studies. Methods: We searched multiple databases until November 2021 for eligible studies that measured both proprioception and motor functions in persons with stroke and reported their correlation or data for correlation analysis. A meta-analysis of the correlations was performed. The subgroup analysis and meta-regression were further conducted to investigate potential factors contributing to the heterogeneity of correlation strength, based on the participants' characteristics, proprioception, and motor function measures. Results: In total, 28 studies comprising of 1,829 participants with stroke were included in the meta-analysis. The overall correlation between proprioception and motor function was significant (r = 0.267, p < 0.05), but there was heterogeneity across studies (I 2 = 45%, p < 0.05). The results of the subgroup analysis showed proprioception of the axial segment in weight-bearing conditions (r = 0.443, p < 0.05) and upper limb without weight-bearing (r = 0.292, p < 0.05) had a stronger correlation with motor function than proprioception of the lower limb without weight-bearing. The proprioception measured through ipsilateral matching (r = 0.412, p < 0.05) showed a stronger correlation with motor function than through contralateral matching. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) domains of motor function, movement function (r = 0.338, p < 0.05), activity performance (r = 0.239, p < 0.05), and independence (r = 0.319, p < 0.05) showed a stronger correlation with proprioception than with other domains. Conclusion: There is a significant correlation between proprioception and motor dysfunction after stroke. The proprioception measured in the axial segment under weight-bearing conditions or measured with ipsilateral matching, and motor function, specifically in the ICF domains of movement function, activity performance, and independence showed a positive contribution to the association between proprioception and motor function. The correlation does not imply causation and might be underestimated by attributes of current tests for proprioception and motor function. Further studies are needed to clarify the cause-effect relationship.

Project description:For reaching and grasping, as well as for manipulating objects, optimal hand motor control arises from the integration of multiple sources of sensory information, such as proprioception and vision. For this reason, proprioceptive deficits often observed in stroke patients have a significant impact on the integrity of motor functions. The present targeted review attempts to reanalyze previous findings about proprioceptive upper-limb deficits in stroke patients, as well as their ability to compensate for these deficits using vision. Our theoretical approach is based on two concepts: first, the description of multi-sensory integration using statistical optimization models; second, on the insight that sensory information is not only encoded in the reference frame of origin (e.g., retinal and joint space for vision and proprioception, respectively), but also in higher-order sensory spaces. Combining these two concepts within a single framework appears to account for the heterogeneity of experimental findings reported in the literature. The present analysis suggests that functional upper limb post-stroke deficits could not only be due to an impairment of the proprioceptive system per se, but also due to deficiencies of cross-references processing; that is of the ability to encode proprioceptive information in a non-joint space. The distinction between purely proprioceptive or cross-reference-related deficits can account for two experimental observations: first, one and the same patient can perform differently depending on specific proprioceptive assessments; and a given behavioral assessment results in large variability across patients. The distinction between sensory and cross-reference deficits is also supported by a targeted literature review on the relation between cerebral structure and proprioceptive function. This theoretical framework has the potential to lead to a new stratification of patients with proprioceptive deficits, and may offer a novel approach to post-stroke rehabilitation.