A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Neural motor control differs between bimanual common-goal vs. bimanual dual-goal tasks. | LitMetric

Neural motor control differs between bimanual common-goal vs. bimanual dual-goal tasks.

Exp Brain Res

Department of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation Science, School of Medicine, University of Maryland Baltimore, 100 Penn Street, Allied Health Building, Baltimore, MD, 21201, USA.

Published: June 2018

Coordinating bimanual movements is essential for everyday activities. Two common types of bimanual tasks are common goal, where two arms share a united goal, and dual goal, which involves independent goals for each arm. Here, we examine how the neural control mechanisms differ between these two types of bimanual tasks. Ten non-disabled individuals performed isometric force tasks of the elbow at 10% of their maximal voluntary force in both bimanual common and dual goals as well as unimanual conditions. Using transcranial magnetic stimulation, we concurrently examined the intracortical inhibitory modulation (short-interval intracortical inhibition, SICI) as well as the interlimb coordination strategies utilized between common- vs. dual-goal tasks. Results showed a reduction of SICI in both hemispheres during dual-goal compared to common-goal tasks (dominant hemisphere: P = 0.04, non-dominant hemisphere: P = 0.03) and unimanual tasks (dominant hemisphere: P = 0.001, non-dominant hemisphere: P = 0.001). For the common-goal task, a reduction of SICI was only seen in the dominant hemisphere compared to unimanual tasks (P = 0.03). Behaviorally, two interlimb coordination patterns were identified. For the common-goal task, both arms were organized into a cooperative "give and take" movement pattern. Control of the non-dominant arm affected stabilization of bimanual force (R = 0.74, P = 0.001). In contrast, for the dual-goal task, both arms were coupled together in a positive fashion and neither arm affected stabilization of bimanual force (R = 0.31, P = 0.1). The finding that intracortical inhibition and interlimb coordination patterns were different based on the goal conceptualization of bimanual tasks has implications for future research.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00221-018-5261-zDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

bimanual tasks
12
interlimb coordination
12
dominant hemisphere
12
bimanual
9
tasks
9
dual-goal tasks
8
types bimanual
8
intracortical inhibition
8
reduction sici
8
tasks dominant
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!