CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 344Motor Control and AdaptationTactile and Sensory InteractionsStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery

Impairments of reaching movements in patients without proprioception. I. Spatial errors

Gordon, J., Ghilardi, M. F., Ghez, C.·1995·Journal of Neurophysiology
DOI 10.1152/jn.1995.73.1.347
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

1. This paper introduces a series of studies in which we analyze the impairments in a planar reaching task in human patients with severe proprioceptive deficits resulting from large-fiber sensory neuropathy. We studied three patients, all of whom showed absence of discriminative tactile sensation, position sense, and stretch reflexes in the upper extremities. Muscle strength was normal. We compared the reaching movements of the patients with those of normal control subjects. The purpose of this first paper was no characterize the spatial errors in these patients that result primarily from impairments in the planning and execution of movement rather than in feedback control. This was done by using a task in which visual feedback of errors during movement was prevented. 2. Subjects were instructed to move their hand from given starting positions of different targets on a horizontal digitizing tablet. Hand position and targets were displayed on a computer screen. Subjects could not see their hand, and the screen display of hand position was blanked at the signal to move. Thus visual feedback during movement could not be used to achieve accuracy. Movement paths were displayed as knowledge of results after each trial. 3. Compared with controls, the patients made large spatial errors in both movement direction and extent. Directional errors were evident from movement onset, suggesting that they resulted from improper planning. In addition, patients' hand paths showed large curves and secondary movements after initial stops. 4. The overall control strategy used by patients appeared the same as that used by controls. Hand trajectories were approximately bell shaped, and movement extent was controlled by scaling a trajectory waveform in amplitude and time. However, both control subjects and patients showed systematic errors in movement extent that depended on the direction of hand movement. In control subjects, these systematic dependencies of extent on direction were small, but in patients they produced large and prominent errors. Analysis of the hand trajectories revealed that errors were associated with differences in velocity and acceleration for movements in different directions. In an earlier study, we showed that in subjects with normal sensation that the dependence of acceleration and velocity on direction results from a failure to take the inertial properties of the limb into account in programming the initial trajectory. In control subjects, these differences in initial acceleration are partially compensated by direction-dependent variations in movement time.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1152/jn.1995.73.1.347

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Restoring proprioception is an important goal as a lack of this sensory modality results in diminished movement accuracy, especially for complex multi-joint movements.

    “Restoring proprioception is an important goal as a lack of this sensory modality results in diminished movement accuracy (Gordon et al., 1995), especially for complex multi-joint movements (Sainburg et al., 1995;1993), which are typical in dayto-day use of the hand.”

    From Biomimetic approaches to bionic touch through a peripheral nerve interface (2015) · cites this paper as Gordon et al., 1995

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Gordon, J., Ghilardi, M. F., & Ghez, C.
Affiliations
New York State Psychiatric Institute (US)
Venue
Journal of Neurophysiology
Publisher
American Physiological Society
Published
1995-01-01
Volume
73
Issue
1
Pages
347-360
ISSN
  • 0022-3077 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-1598
DOI
10.1152/jn.1995.73.1.347
OpenAlex
W2159728518
Cited by
344
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 9
FWCI
4.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Neurophysiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01ns022715-14)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NS 22715)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Keywords
proprioception, proprioceptive deficits, reaching movements, spatial error, motor planning, movement execution, trajectory control, movement direction, velocity and acceleration, movement time, visual feedback, knowledge of results, upper limb
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Functional Laterality, Male, Motor Activity, Movement, Neurons, Afferent, Proprioception, Spatial Behavior

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review