2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.neulet.2014.12.028
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Bimanual force variability in chronic stroke: With and without visual information

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
12
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
(74 reference statements)
2
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Force production by individuals in the chronic phase after stroke reveals greater error and greater variability when using the impaired hand ( Kang and Cauraugh, 2015b , Lodha et al, 2010 ). Dependence on visual feedback increases after stroke ( Bonan et al, 2004a , Kang and Cauraugh, 2015a , Westerveld et al, 2013 ), with evidence suggesting that manipulating visual feedback can enhance motor function ( Brewer et al, 2005 , Brewer et al, 2008 , Patton et al, 2006 , Tunik et al, 2013 ) by decreasing motor error and motor variability after stroke ( Archer et al, 2016 ). Although these findings converge to suggest that modulating visual feedback is a viable option to improve motor output ( Carter et al, 2010 , Tunik et al, 2013 ), the neurophysiological basis for this improvement has not been examined.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Force production by individuals in the chronic phase after stroke reveals greater error and greater variability when using the impaired hand ( Kang and Cauraugh, 2015b , Lodha et al, 2010 ). Dependence on visual feedback increases after stroke ( Bonan et al, 2004a , Kang and Cauraugh, 2015a , Westerveld et al, 2013 ), with evidence suggesting that manipulating visual feedback can enhance motor function ( Brewer et al, 2005 , Brewer et al, 2008 , Patton et al, 2006 , Tunik et al, 2013 ) by decreasing motor error and motor variability after stroke ( Archer et al, 2016 ). Although these findings converge to suggest that modulating visual feedback is a viable option to improve motor output ( Carter et al, 2010 , Tunik et al, 2013 ), the neurophysiological basis for this improvement has not been examined.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Beyond the effects of offline-bandwidth visual feedback, we additionally confirmed that providing the online-bandwidth visual feedback with narrower BTR effectively minimized inconsistency of motor outputs during task execution. Greater amount of visual information (e.g., increased visual gain) may decrease motor variability during continuous isometric force production tasks [41,42] because of the reduced neural noise (e.g., synaptic noise of motor neurons pool) on motor unit discharge [43]. Similarly, given that the narrow BTR of bandwidth visual feedback may provide more frequent visual cues to a performer during isometric force control tasks [20], the increased amount of visual information presumably minimized neural noise contributing to less force variability.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In studies of gripping [ 18 ], reaching [ 36 , 37 ] and multi-joint arm movement [ 38 ], greater neuromotor noise was reported in subjects after stroke. Neuromotor noise causes more errors in force output, and post-stroke subjects would rely more on feedback control to correct the errors [ 39 ]. As reported by Kim et al [ 14 ], the decrease in smoothness was accompanied by an increase in the number of force corrections.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%