Proprioceptive performance of bilateral upper and lower limb joints: side-general and site-specific effects

Abstract

Superiority of the left upper limb in proprioception tasks performed by right-handed individuals has been attributed to better utilization of proprioceptive information by a non-preferred arm/hemisphere system. However, it is undetermined whether this holds for multiple upper and lower limb joints. Accordingly, the present study tested active movement proprioception at four pairs of upper and lower limb joints, after selecting twelve participants with both strong right arm and right leg preference. A battery of versions of the active movement extent discrimination apparatus were employed to generate the stimuli for movements of different extents at the ankle, knee, shoulder and fingers on the right and left sides of the body, and discrimination scores were derived from participants’ responses. Proprioceptive performance on the non-preferred left side was significantly better than the preferred right side at all four joints tested (overall F1, 11 = 36.36, p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.77). In the 8 × 8 matrix formed by all joints, only correlations between the proprioceptive accuracy scores for the right and left sides at the same joint were significant (ankles 0.93, knees 0.89, shoulders 0.87, fingers 0.91, p ≤ 0.001; all others r ≤ 0.40, p ≥ 0.20). The results point to both a side-general effect and a site-specific effect in the integration of proprioceptive information during active movement tasks, whereby the non-preferred limb/hemisphere system is specialized in the utilization of the best proprioceptive sources available at each specific joint, but the combination of sources employed differs between body sites.

Does Elastic Resistance Affect Finger Pinch Discrimination?

“…No significant difference was evident between the two hands in this study, contrary to other studies in which the finger on the dominant and nondominant sides show differences in performance (Han, Anson, Waddington, & Adams, 2013;Roy & MacKenzie, 1978;Wycherley et al, 2005). A recent study (Goble & Brown, 2010) recruited extreme right-handers, those with a handedness quotient of +100 on the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory (Oldfield, 1971), and found distinct nondominant side advantage in upper-limb position matching.…”

A Proprioceptive Ability Factor Underlying All Proprioception Tests? Response to Tremblay (2013)

“…In an extension of our original Han, Waddington, et al . (2013a) study using a new sample, we tested proprioceptive ability on both sides of the body at the ankles, knees, shoulders, and fi ngers ( Han, Anson, Waddington, & Adams, 2013 ). The results replicated 302 our earlier fi ndings, with no signifi cant correlations found between the proprioceptive accuracy scores at diff erent joints.…”

Neural correlates of lower limbs proprioception: An fMRI study of foot position matching

“…Han, Anson, Waddington, and Adams () and Symes, Waddington, and Adams () have suggested a better proprioceptive acuity on the nonpreferred side across different joints and anatomical regions for both upper and lower limb. However, the correlation between left nondominant and right dominant limb proprioceptive performance was explored only in ipsilateral tasks involving active movements toward physical stops and with a limited number of subjects.…”

“…Other behavioral studies focused on the upper limb have demonstrated a left dominance in position sense processing during ipsilateral and contralateral matching tasks (Goble, Lewis, & Brown, 2006;Goble & Brown, 2008) and this proprioceptive asymmetry was associated with differences in performance and control strategies between the two arms (Sainburg, 2002;Sainburg & Schaefer, 2004). Han, Anson, Waddington, and Adams (2013) and Symes, Waddington, and Adams (2010) have suggested a better proprioceptive acuity on the nonpreferred side across different joints and anatomical regions for both upper and lower limb. However, the correlation between left nondominant and right dominant limb proprioceptive performance was explored only in ipsilateral tasks involving active movements toward physical stops and with a limited number of subjects.…”