Abstract: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) exerts beneficial effects on motor recovery after stroke, presumably by enhancement of adaptive neural plasticity. However, patients with extensive damage may experience null or deleterious effects with the predominant application mode of anodal (excitatory) stimulation of the damaged hemisphere. In such cases, excitatory stimulation of the non-damaged hemisphere might be considered. Here we asked whether tDCS exerts a measurable effect on movement quality of the hemiparetic upper limb, following just a single treatment session. Such effect may inform on the hemisphere that should be excited. Using a single-blinded crossover experimental design, stroke patients and healthy control subjects were assessed before and after anodal, cathodal and sham tDCS, each provided during a single session of reaching training (repeated point-to-point hand movement on an electronic tablet). Group comparisons of endpoint kinematics at baseline-number of peaks in the speed profile (NoP; smoothness), hand-path deviations from the straight line (SLD; accuracy) and movement time (MT; speed)-disclosed greater NoP, larger SLD and longer MT in the stroke group. NoP and MT revealed an advantage for anodal compared to sham stimulation of the lesioned hemisphere. NoP and MT improvements under anodal stimulation of the non-lesioned hemisphere correlated positively with the severity of hemiparesis. Damage to specific cortical regions and white-matter tracts was associated with lower kinematic gains from tDCS. The study shows that simple descriptors of movement kinematics of the hemiparetic upper limb are sensitive enough to demonstrate gain from neuromodulation by tDCS, following just a single session of reaching training. Moreover, the results show that tDCS-related gain is affected by the severity of baseline motor impairment, and by lesion topography.

Abstract: Natural human behavior arises from continuous interactions between the cognitive and motor domains. However, assessments of cognitive abilities are typically conducted using pen and paper tests, i.e., in isolation from “real life” cognitive-motor behavior and in artificial contexts. In the current study, we aimed to assess cognitive-motor task performance in a more naturalistic setting while recording multiple motor and eye tracking signals. Specifically, we aimed to (i) delineate the contribution of cognitive and motor components to overall task performance and (ii) probe for a link between cognitive-motor performance and pupil size. To that end, we used a virtual reality (VR) adaptation of a well-established neurocognitive test for executive functions, the 'Color Trails Test' (CTT). The VR-CTT involves performing 3D reaching movements to follow a trail of numbered targets. To tease apart the cognitive and motor components of task performance, we included two additional conditions: a condition where participants only used their eyes to perform the CTT task (using an eye tracking device), incurring reduced motor demands, and a condition where participants manually tracked visually-cued targets without numbers on them, incurring reduced cognitive demands. Our results from a group of 30 older adults (>65) showed that reducing cognitive demands shortened completion times more extensively than reducing motor demands. Conditions with higher cognitive demands had longer target search time, as well as decreased movement execution velocity and head-hand coordination. We found larger pupil sizes in the more cognitively demanding conditions, and an inverse correlation between pupil size and completion times across individuals in all task conditions. Lastly, we found a possible link between VR-CTT performance measures and clinical signatures of participants (fallers versus non-fallers). In summary, performance and pupil parameters were mainly dependent on task cognitive load, while maintaining systematic interindividual differences. We suggest that this paradigm opens the possibility for more detailed profiling of individual cognitive-motor performance capabilities in older adults and other at-risk populations.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Therapists specializing in handwriting difficulties in children often address motor problems including both proximal and distal movements in the upper extremity. Kinematic measures can be used to investigate various aspects of handwriting. This study examined differences in movement patterns in proximal and distal joints of the upper extremity during graphomotor tasks between typically developing children with and without handwriting problems. Additionally, it explored relationships between movement patterns, speed, and legibility of writing. METHODS: Forty-one children, aged 7-11 years, were assessed with the Aleph Aleph Ktav Yad Hebrew Handwriting assessment and the Beery Test of Visual Motor Integration and, based on their scores, were divided into a research group (with handwriting difficulties) and a control group (without handwriting difficulties). Upper extremity joint movement patterns were analyzed with a motion capture system. Differences in the quality of shapes traced and copied on a graphics tablet positioned horizontally and vertically were compared. Between-group differences and relationships with speed and legibility were analyzed. RESULTS: In both groups, there was greater movement in the distal compared to the proximal joints, greater movement when performing the task in a horizontal compared to a vertical plane, and greater movement when tracing than copying. Joint movements in the arm executed scaled-down versions of the shapes being drawn. While the amount of joint displacement was similar between groups, children in the research group showed greater dissimilarity between the drawn shape and the shape produced by the proximal joints. Finally, the drawing measure on the tablet was a significant predictor of legibility, speed of writing, visual motor integration and motor coordination, whereas the dissimilarity measure of joint movement was a significant predictor of speed of writing and motor coordination. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides support for the role of the distal upper extremity joints in the writing process and some guidance to assist clinicians in devising treatment strategies for movement-related handwriting problems. While we observed differences in proximal joint movements between the children with and without handwriting difficulties, the extent to which they are responsible for the differences in drawing quality remains to be determined. Further studies should use a similar methodology to examine additional tasks such as drawing shapes of varying sizes.