2004
DOI: 10.1016/j.brainresrev.2004.07.013
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Investigating the cortical origins of motor overflow

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

6
122
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 142 publications
(132 citation statements)
references
References 121 publications
6
122
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our study is of interest because the task that subjects purposely performed (right index finger abduction) was similar in the two conditions, yet the (inadvertent) output of the left hand differed depending on its orientation. In review papers concerning contralateral activation (Hoy et al, 2004;Carson, 2005; Cincotta and Ziemann, 2008), associated activity is often implicitly connected with the homologous muscle. Our observations suggest that the direction of contralateral associated activity is organized according to movement direction rather than in relation to active muscle identities.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Our study is of interest because the task that subjects purposely performed (right index finger abduction) was similar in the two conditions, yet the (inadvertent) output of the left hand differed depending on its orientation. In review papers concerning contralateral activation (Hoy et al, 2004;Carson, 2005; Cincotta and Ziemann, 2008), associated activity is often implicitly connected with the homologous muscle. Our observations suggest that the direction of contralateral associated activity is organized according to movement direction rather than in relation to active muscle identities.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This implies that the small difference in direction sensitivity during the brief contractions is very likely attributable to lack of statistical power and not to a difference in command strategy between brief and sustained contractions. Several reviews (Hoy et al, 2004;Carson, 2005;Cincotta and Ziemann, 2008) discuss the possible neuronal pathways involved in associated activity. In short, the models attribute associated activity to activation coming through ipsilateral pathways, contralateral pathways, or an interaction between the ipsilateral and contralateral areas [Zijdewind et al (2006), their Fig.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is evidence that motor overflow is due to insufficient interhemispheric inhibition via the corpus callosum. [17][18][19] Better movement quality of females could be interpreted in two ways: first, the female brain is more capable of inhibitory processes; second, this interhemispheric inhibition is a maturational process, and females are advanced by almost 2 years in bone age and puberty. To address this, the current researchers analyzed contralateral AMs for a group of adults (n=145) at ages 45 to 55 years and found no sex difference (p=0.47).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition to cross facilitation, other hypotheses that may explain the results observed in this study are the theory of motor overflow (TMO) 9,14 and the summation of proprioceptive inputs (SPI) 10 . According to the TMO, when a portion of the brain is activated, other parts are also stimulated 9 , which demonstrates that when a cortical region is activated due to voluntary contraction, the same area in the opposite hemisphere may be activated 14 . Another theory to explain the effects of remote muscle contractions is summation of proprioceptive inputs to the motor cortex 28 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This phenomenon has been widely investigated; however, most studies investigating the effects of remote voluntary contraction have examined the influence of upper limb contraction on the performance of lower limb tasks and vice versa 9,12 , as well as strategies such as jaw clenching and Valsava maneuver 13 . In these situations, the observed increase in performance is due to hypotheses such as theory of motor overflow (TMO) 9,14 and the summation of proprioceptive inputs (SPI) 10 . However, Weineck 8 has suggested that the increase in performance by simultaneous contraction of contralateral muscles performing opposite movements might be explained (at least in part) by the contralateral coactivation phenomenon, although, there is a gap in the literature about the effects of contralateral coactivation on acute performance.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%