Progress in Vibrotactile Threshold Evaluation Techniques: A Review

Gandhi, Minu Shikha; Sesek, Richard; Tuckett, Robert P.; Bamberg, Stacy J. Morris

doi:10.1016/j.jht.2011.01.001

Cited by 46 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 119 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We found that detection thresholds were consistent for both, the ''active'' and ''passive'' threshold estimation procedure. Although results were rather stable across conditions, we obtained relatively higher threshold values compared to those reported in the literature (Gescheider et al, 2009;Gandhi et al, 2011).…”

Section: Discussion (Experiments 1)contrasting

confidence: 47%

A Tactile Virtual Reality for the Study of Active Somatosensation

Bhattacharjee

Kajal

Patrono

et al. 2020

Front. Integr. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Natural exploration of textures involves active sensing, i.e., voluntary movements of tactile sensors (e.g., human fingertips or rodent whiskers) across a target surface. Somatosensory input during moving tactile sensors varies according to both the movement and the surface texture. Combining motor and sensory information, the brain is capable of extracting textural features of the explored surface. Despite the ecological relevance of active sensing, psychophysical studies on active touch are largely missing. One reason for the lack of informative studies investigating active touch is the considerable challenge of assembling an appropriate experimental setup. A possible solution might be in the realm of virtual tactile reality that provides tactile finger stimulation depending on the position of the hand and the simulated texture of a target surface. In addition to rigorous behavioral studies, the investigation of the neuronal mechanisms of active tactile sensing in humans is highly warranted, requiring neurophysiological experiments using electroencephalography (EEG), magnetoencephalography (MEG) and/or functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). However, current neuroimaging techniques impose specific requirements on the tactile stimulus delivery equipment in terms of compatibility with the neurophysiological methods being used. Here, we present a user-friendly, MEG compatible, tactile virtual reality simulator. The simulator consists of a piezo-electric tactile stimulator capable of independently protruding 16 plastic pistons of 1 mm diameter arranged in a 4 × 4 matrix. The stimulator delivers a spatial pattern of tactile stimuli to the tip of a finger depending on the position of the finger moving across a 2-dimensional plane. In order to demonstrate the functionality of the tactile virtual reality, we determined participants' detection thresholds in active and passive touch conditions. Thresholds in both conditions were higher than reported in the literature. It could well be that the processing of the piston-related stimulation was masked by the sensory input generated by placing the finger on the scanning probe. More so, the thresholds for both the active and passive tasks did not differ significantly. In further studies, the noise introduced by the stimulator in neuromagnetic recordings was quantified and somatosensory evoked fields for active and passive touch were recorded. Due Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience | www.frontiersin.org 1 February 2020 | Volume 14 | Article 5Bhattacharjee et al.Virtual Reality for Active Touch to the compatibility of the stimulator with neuroimaging techniques such as MEG, and based on the feasibility to record somatosensory-related neuromagnetic brain activity the apparatus has immense potential for the exploration of the neural underpinnings of active tactile perception.

show abstract

Section: Discussion (Experiments 1)contrasting

confidence: 47%

A Tactile Virtual Reality for the Study of Active Somatosensation

Bhattacharjee

Kajal

Patrono

et al. 2020

Front. Integr. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In that study, VPT was measured at two frequencies. There is currently no consensus regarding neither design of test equipment, nor which and how many frequencies should be included to test VPT 16. Most of the literature investigating dose–response is based on exposure assessments on a group level with self-reported exposure time, likely to bias associations 17 18…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dose–response relationship between hand–arm vibration exposure and vibrotactile thresholds among roadworkers

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundTesting of vibration perception threshold (VPT) at the fingertips as a quantitative measure of tactile sensitivity is a commonly used tool in diagnosing hand–arm vibration syndrome. There is limited research on dose–response relationships between hand–arm vibration (HAV) exposure and VPT on an individual level.AimsAssess possible dose–response relationships on an individual level between HAV exposure and VPT at the fingertips.MethodsWe assessed average daily vibration exposure (m/s2A8) and cumulative lifetime HAV exposure for 104 participants from different departments in a road maintenance company based on vibration measurements and questionnaires. VPT was measured based on the technical method described in ISO 13091-1:2005 using octave frequencies 8–500 Hz. We investigated associations using linear regression models with significance level p≤0.05.ResultsThe participants were either exposed to rock drills (n=33), impact wrenches (n=52) or none of these tools (n=19). Exposure to rock drills and impact wrenches was associated with elevated VPT for all seven test frequencies in the second and fifth fingers of both hands. A dose–response with the daily exposure measure m/s2(A8) was found based on 1.2 m/s2(A8) for impact wrenches, and 5.4 m/s2(A8) for rock drills. A stronger association was found with the cumulative exposure for rock drills compared with impact wrenches, and for the second finger compared with the fifth finger.ConclusionsHAV exposure was associated with elevated VPT, also at exposure levels below the common exposure action value of 2.5 m/s2(A8). Lowering the HAV exposure can contribute to prevent increasing VPTs in these workers.

show abstract

“…Applications of mechanical vibration are a commonly used technique to activate low threshold cutaneous afferents (Johansson et al, 1982; Ribot-Ciscar et al, 1989; Gandhi et al, 2011; Mildren et al, 2016). Studies employing microneurographic recordings of single cutaneous afferents demonstrate robust discharge responsiveness to vibration when applied over their receptive fields (Johansson et al, 1982; Trulsson, 2001; Lowrey et al, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cutaneous Mechanoreceptor Feedback from the Hand and Foot Can Modulate Muscle Sympathetic Nerve Activity

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stimulation of high threshold mechanical nociceptors on the skin can modulate efferent sympathetic outflow. Whether low threshold mechanoreceptors from glabrous skin are similarly capable of modulating autonomic outflow is unclear. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the effects of cutaneous afferent feedback from the hand palm and foot sole on efferent muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA). Fifteen healthy young participants (9 male; 25 ± 3 years [range: 22–29]) underwent microneurographic recording of multi-unit MSNA from the right fibular nerve during 2 min of baseline and 2 min of mechanical vibration (150 Hz, 220 μm peak-to-peak) applied to the left hand or foot. Each participant completed three trials of both hand and foot stimulation, each separated by 5 min. MSNA burst frequency decreased similarly during the 2 min of both hand (20.8 ± 8.9 vs. 19.3 ± 8.6 bursts/minute [Δ −8%], p = 0.035) and foot (21.0 ± 8.3 vs. 19.5 ± 8.3 bursts/minute [Δ −8%], p = 0.048) vibration but did not alter normalized mean burst amplitude or area (All p > 0.05). Larger reductions in burst frequency were observed during the first 10 s (onset) of both hand (20.8 ± 8.9 vs. 17.0 ± 10.4 [Δ −25%], p < 0.001) and foot (21.0 ± 8.3 vs. 18.3 ± 9.4 [Δ −16%], p = 0.035) vibration, in parallel with decreases in normalized mean burst amplitude (hand: 0.45 ± 0.06 vs. 0.36 ± 0.14% [Δ −19%], p = 0.03; foot: 0.47 ± 0.07 vs. 0.34 ± 0.19% [Δ −27%], p = 0.02) and normalized mean burst area (hand: 0.42 ± 0.05 vs. 0.32 ± 0.12% [Δ −25%], p = 0.003; foot: 0.47 ± 0.05 vs. 0.34 ± 0.16% [Δ −28%], p = 0.01). These results demonstrate that tactile feedback from the hands and feet can influence efferent sympathetic outflow to skeletal muscle.

show abstract

Progress in Vibrotactile Threshold Evaluation Techniques: A Review

Cited by 46 publications

References 119 publications

A Tactile Virtual Reality for the Study of Active Somatosensation

A Tactile Virtual Reality for the Study of Active Somatosensation

Dose–response relationship between hand–arm vibration exposure and vibrotactile thresholds among roadworkers

Cutaneous Mechanoreceptor Feedback from the Hand and Foot Can Modulate Muscle Sympathetic Nerve Activity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About