Effects of finger pinch motor imagery on short-latency afferent inhibition and corticospinal excitability.

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q4 NEUROSCIENCES
Neuroreport Pub Date : 2024-04-03 Epub Date: 2024-03-07 DOI:10.1097/WNR.0000000000002025
Kento Nakashoji, Atsushi Sasaki, Naotsugu Kaneko, Taishin Nomura, Matija Milosevic
{"title":"Effects of finger pinch motor imagery on short-latency afferent inhibition and corticospinal excitability.","authors":"Kento Nakashoji, Atsushi Sasaki, Naotsugu Kaneko, Taishin Nomura, Matija Milosevic","doi":"10.1097/WNR.0000000000002025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Motor imagery is a cognitive process involving the simulation of motor actions without actual movements. Despite the reported positive effects of motor imagery training on motor function, the underlying neurophysiological mechanisms have yet to be fully elucidated. Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to investigate how sustained tonic finger-pinching motor imagery modulates sensorimotor integration and corticospinal excitability using short-latency afferent inhibition (SAI) and single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) assessments, respectively. Able-bodied individuals participated in the study and assessments were conducted under two experimental conditions in a randomized order between participants: (1) participants performed motor imagery of a pinch task while observing a visual image displayed on a monitor (Motor Imagery), and (2) participants remained at rest with their eyes fixed on the monitor displaying a cross mark (Control). For each condition, sensorimotor integration and corticospinal excitability were evaluated during sustained tonic motor imagery in separate sessions. Sensorimotor integration was assessed by SAI responses, representing inhibition of motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) in the first dorsal interosseous muscle elicited by TMS following median nerve stimulation. Corticospinal excitability was assessed by MEP responses elicited by single-pulse TMS. There was no significant difference in the magnitude of SAI responses between motor imagery and Control conditions, while MEP responses were significantly facilitated during the Motor Imagery condition compared to the Control condition. These findings suggest that motor imagery facilitates corticospinal excitability, without altering sensorimotor integration, possibly due to insufficient activation of the somatosensory circuits or lack of afferent feedback during sustained tonic motor imagery.</p>","PeriodicalId":19213,"journal":{"name":"Neuroreport","volume":" ","pages":"413-420"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuroreport","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/WNR.0000000000002025","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Motor imagery is a cognitive process involving the simulation of motor actions without actual movements. Despite the reported positive effects of motor imagery training on motor function, the underlying neurophysiological mechanisms have yet to be fully elucidated. Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to investigate how sustained tonic finger-pinching motor imagery modulates sensorimotor integration and corticospinal excitability using short-latency afferent inhibition (SAI) and single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) assessments, respectively. Able-bodied individuals participated in the study and assessments were conducted under two experimental conditions in a randomized order between participants: (1) participants performed motor imagery of a pinch task while observing a visual image displayed on a monitor (Motor Imagery), and (2) participants remained at rest with their eyes fixed on the monitor displaying a cross mark (Control). For each condition, sensorimotor integration and corticospinal excitability were evaluated during sustained tonic motor imagery in separate sessions. Sensorimotor integration was assessed by SAI responses, representing inhibition of motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) in the first dorsal interosseous muscle elicited by TMS following median nerve stimulation. Corticospinal excitability was assessed by MEP responses elicited by single-pulse TMS. There was no significant difference in the magnitude of SAI responses between motor imagery and Control conditions, while MEP responses were significantly facilitated during the Motor Imagery condition compared to the Control condition. These findings suggest that motor imagery facilitates corticospinal excitability, without altering sensorimotor integration, possibly due to insufficient activation of the somatosensory circuits or lack of afferent feedback during sustained tonic motor imagery.

捏指运动想象对短时传入抑制和皮质脊髓兴奋性的影响
运动想象是一种在没有实际动作的情况下模拟运动动作的认知过程。尽管有报道称运动想象训练对运动功能有积极影响,但其潜在的神经生理机制尚未完全阐明。因此,本研究旨在通过短时传入抑制(SAI)和单脉冲经颅磁刺激(TMS)评估,分别研究持续强直性捏指运动想象如何调节感觉运动整合和皮质脊髓兴奋性。参加研究的人员均为健全人,评估在两种实验条件下进行,参与者之间顺序随机:(1)参与者在观察显示器上显示的视觉图像的同时进行捏合任务的运动想象(运动想象);(2)参与者保持静止,眼睛盯着显示器上显示的十字标记(对照组)。在每种条件下,分别对持续强直运动想象期间的感觉运动整合和皮质脊髓兴奋性进行评估。感觉运动整合通过 SAI 反应进行评估,SAI 反应代表正中神经刺激后 TMS 在第一背侧骨间肌引起的运动诱发电位 (MEP) 抑制。皮质脊髓兴奋性通过单脉冲 TMS 引起的 MEP 反应进行评估。在运动想象和对照组条件下,SAI 反应的幅度没有明显差异,而与对照组条件相比,运动想象条件下的 MEP 反应则有明显的促进作用。这些研究结果表明,运动想象促进了皮质脊髓的兴奋性,但没有改变感觉运动整合,这可能是由于在持续的强直性运动想象过程中没有充分激活躯体感觉回路或缺乏传入反馈。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Neuroreport
Neuroreport 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
150
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: NeuroReport is a channel for rapid communication of new findings in neuroscience. It is a forum for the publication of short but complete reports of important studies that require very fast publication. Papers are accepted on the basis of the novelty of their finding, on their significance for neuroscience and on a clear need for rapid publication. Preliminary communications are not suitable for the Journal. Submitted articles undergo a preliminary review by the editor. Some articles may be returned to authors without further consideration. Those being considered for publication will undergo further assessment and peer-review by the editors and those invited to do so from a reviewer pool. The core interest of the Journal is on studies that cast light on how the brain (and the whole of the nervous system) works. We aim to give authors a decision on their submission within 2-5 weeks, and all accepted articles appear in the next issue to press.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信