Affiliations: [a] Department of Biomedical Engineering, Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI, USA | [b] Department of Radiology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA | [c] Department of Psychology, Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI, USA | [d] Department of Neurology, Zablocki Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Milwaukee, WI, USA
Correspondence:
[*]
Corresponding author: Dominic E. Nathan, BioElectronics Research Lab, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Marquette University, 1515W Wisconsin Ave, Milwaukee WI 53233, USA. Tel.: +1 414 243 1845; E-mail: [email protected]
Abstract: Objective:To understand neural correlates of upper extremity task performance (functional vs. non-functional) and to understand their influence on neuromotor control strategies. Design:Cross-sectional descriptive study, with repeated measures. Setting:Medical center 1.5T MRI clinical imaging facility. Participants:Neurologically intact individuals, (M = 14 F = 5 mean age = 22.94 ± 3.1 years) all right hand dominant as determined by the Edinburgh handedness survey. Subjects performed upper extremity motor tasks of reaching and grasping in a block paradigm. Whole brain fMRI data was acquired using a 1.5T MRI scanner. Main outcome measures:Differences in fMRI area of activation and maximum activation intensity for the whole brain were evaluated among the different upper extremity motor tasks. Results:Our results indicate (a) Activations in brain regions are task specific. (b) ANOVA results indicate functional goal oriented movements of reaching and grasping produce higher activation intensity (p < 0.0001) in more regions of the cortex (Somatosensory motor area, primary motor cortex, and parietal region) and cerebellum (p < 0.001) as compared to nonfunctional rhythmic movements of reaching only and grasping only. (c) There is some overlap in cerebellar activations, however areas of activation in the medial cerebellum were observed for reaching-and-grasping, while the grasping-only task produced activation more laterally in the cerebellum. Conclusions:Our findings suggest that (a) neuromotor strategy for functional goal-oriented movements is different from rhythmic movements such as finger tapping or non-functional movements, (b) This difference can be quantified and mapped using fMRI. (c) There are some overlap with activation of movement execution however the cognitive component that mediates the specific movement is not just the linear combination of simple movements rather it is task and context specific. (d) The results support the concept of using goal-oriented tasks in the applications of rehabilitation and therapy for restoration of function.
Keywords: Functional goal-oriented movements, upper extremity neurorehabilitation, functional motor tasks, upper extremity neuromotor control
