Alteration of proprioceptive messages induced by tendon vibration in man: a microneurographic study

Abstract

The activities of single proprioceptive fibres were recorded from the lateral peroneal nerve using transcutaneously implanted tungsten microelectrodes. Unitary discharges originating from muscle spindle primary and secondary endings and Golgi tendon organs were identified by means of various physiological tests. The sensitivity of proprioceptors to mechanical vibrations with a constant low amplitude (0.2-0.5 mm) applied at various frequencies to the tendon of the receptor-bearing muscle was studied. Muscle spindle primary endings (Ia fibres) were found to be the most sensitive to this mechanical stimulus. In some cases their discharge could be driven in a one-to-one manner up to 180 Hz. Most of them also fired harmonically with the vibration up to 80 Hz and then discharged in a subharmonic manner (1/2-1/3) with increasing vibration frequencies. Muscle spindle secondary endings (II fibres) and Golgi tendon organs (Ib fibres) were found to be either insensitive or only slightly sensitive to tendon vibration in relaxed muscles. The effects of tendon vibration on muscle spindle sensory endings response to muscle lengthening and shortening induced by imposed constant velocity or sinusoidal movements of the ankle joint were studied. Modulation of the proprioceptive discharge frequency coding the various joint movement parameters was either completely or partly masked by the receptor response to vibration, depending on the vibration frequency. Moreover, vibrations combined with sinusoidal joint movements elicited quantitatively erroneous proprioceptive messages concerning the movement parameters (amplitude, velocity). The sensitivity of the Golgi tendon organs to vibration increased greatly when the receptor-bearing muscle was tonically contracted. These data confirm that vibration is able to preferentially activate the Ia afferent channel, even when the vibration amplitude is low. They define the frequency sensitivity of the muscle spindle primary and secondary endings and the Golgi tendon organs. They also show that the physiological messages triggered by ongoing motor activities undergo a series of changes during the exposure of muscles to vibration.

Whole-body vibration alters proprioception in the trunk

“…Vibrations below 80 Hz applied directly to the muscle or the associated tendon have been demonstrated to have a one-to-one association between the vibration and activity in the Ia afferents from the muscle spindle organs in a number of muscles including the tibialis anterior and extensor digitorum longus (Roll et al, 1989). This stimulation, which can cause kinesthetic illusions of muscle lengthening, has also been demonstrated to have longer term effects after removal of the vibration (Cordo et al, 1995, Shinohara, 2005, Wierzbicka et al, 1998.…”

“…In the extremities, previous studies examining the post-vibration effects on the muscle spindle organs and neuromotor system have been performed at frequencies ranging from 20 to 150 Hz (Roll and Vedel, 1982, Roll et al, 1989, Shinohara, 2005.…”

Ankle proprioception is not targeted by exercises on an unstable surface

“…In studies on the role of proprioception in standing, vibration is used to analyze the relative contribution of a peripheral proprioceptive signal to the total motor output. Vibration is a potent stimulus for primary and secondary muscle spindles endings and Golgi tendon organs in muscles (Burke et al 1976a, b;Roll et al 1989). Vibration induces a bias into the muscle spindle output.…”

The Role of the Suprasprinal Center during Soleus Stretching Reflexes with Simultaneous Vibration

“…This result does not support the theory of disynaptic inhibition alone, because the Sol MLR area during the MV condition increased. When subjects support themselves by holding onto a stable frame, then the same foot rotation elicits responses of a smaller magnitude, of less than 20% on the average of the control value 23,26) . This finding led to the conclusion that monoaminergic brain stem centers selectively modulate the stimulation of the interneuronal pathways responsible for the transmission of group II input 19) .…”