The precision of motor control in human jaw and limb muscles during isometric contraction in the presence of visual feedback

Steenberghe, Daniël van; Bonte, Bernard; Schols, Hilde; Jacobs, Reinhilde; Schotte, Astrid

doi:10.1016/0003-9969(91)90150-s

Cited by 19 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, visual feedback had no in¯uence on the oscillation of bite force (isometric bite-force tremor) in the control subjects or the patients with bruxism. In line with the present results, it has previously been reported that visual feedback has no marked eect on the control of bite force (Van Steenberghe et al 1991). However, if loads requiring considerably higher bite forces than in the present study are used and the tremor analysed using a more sophisticated method (fast Fourier transformation) isometric biteforce tremor has been shown to be signi®cantly dependent on visual feedback (Broekhuijsen and van Willigen 1994).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Altered control of submaximal bite force during bruxism in humans

Mäntyvaara

Sjöholm

Kirjavainen

et al. 1999

European Journal of Applied Physiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The control of bite force during varying submaximal loads was examined in patients suffering from bruxism compared to healthy humans not showing these symptoms. The subjects raised a bar (preload) with their incisor teeth and held it between their upper and lower incisors using the minimal bite force required to keep the bar in a horizontal position. Further loading was added during the preload phase. A sham load was also used. Depending on the session, the teeth were loaded by the experimenter or the subject and in one session the subject did not see the load (no visual feedback). The bite force was measured continuously using a calibrated force transducer. In all the subjects, the bite force increased with increasing load. Following the addition of the load, the level of the tonic bite force was reached rapidly with no marked overshoot. The patients with bruxism used significantly higher bite forces to hold the submaximal loads compared to the control subjects. In the control subjects, the holding forces for each submaximal load were identical in the men and the women and were independent of subject maximal bite force. Sham loading evoked no marked responses in biting force. Whether the subject or the experimenter added the load or whether the subject had visual feedback or not were not significant factors in determining the level of bite force. The results indicated that the patients with bruxism used excessively large biting forces for each given submaximal load. This study showed no evidence that the inappropriate control of bite force by patients with bruxism was due to an abnormality in the higher cortical circuits that regulates the function of trigeminal motoneurons in the brainstem. This was shown by a lack of abnormality in coordination of voluntary hand movement with biting force, a lack of abnormal anticipation response to a sham load and a lack of any effect of visual feedback. The results were in line with the hypothesis that afferent input from oral (periodontal or masticatory muscle) tissues does not provide an appropriate control of motor command in bruxism.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Whether visual feedback is important also for the control of biting has been debated (Broekhuijsen and van Willigen 1994;Van Steenberghe et al 1991). In the present study bite forces were identical with and without visual feedback and no dierence between the patients with bruxism and the controls was observed in this respect.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Altered control of submaximal bite force during bruxism in humans

Mäntyvaara

Sjöholm

Kirjavainen

et al. 1999

European Journal of Applied Physiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Comparisons of manual and oral systems have suggested that in young (Jacobs, van Steenberghe, & Schotte, 1992;Loucks et al, 2010;van Steenberghe, Bonte, Schols, Jacobs, & Schotte, 1991) and middle-aged (Gentil & Tournier, 1998) adults, the oral effectors are optimized for speed, and the manual effectors for accuracy and load bearing. This differentiation is apparent even in preschool, but while children's strength and accuracy improve with age in both effectors, the variability of constant force production improves only in the hand (Potter, Kent, & Lazarus, 2009).…”

Section: Fine Force Control Of Manual and Oral Effectors In Agingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In young adults, feedback modality influenced force control: for both oral and manual effectors, visual feedback resulted in less variable and less structured force production than auditory feedback (Ofori et al, 2012). Force variability was greater for oral than manual effectors under both auditory and visual feedback in combination with proprioception (Loucks et al, 2010;Ofori et al, 2012;van Steenberghe et al, 1991), though this effect may be reversed when only proprioceptive feedback is available (De Nil & Lafaille, 2002).…”

Section: Effect Of Feedback Modality On Fine Force Control In Aging Imentioning

confidence: 99%

Aging Effects on Sensorimotor Integration: A Comparison of Effector Systems and Feedback Modalities

Bronson-Lowe

Loucks

Ofori

et al. 2013

Journal of Motor Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on motor aging has focused on visuomotor effects in limb musculature, with few comparisons across effectors or feedback modalities. The authors examined steady fine force control in oral and manual effectors under visual and auditory feedback in 13 young (19-23 years old) and 13 older (60-77 years old) participants, hypothesizing that force variability would increase with aging (a) more in the finger than the lip and (b) for both feedback modalities. The magnitude of variability increased with age for both visuomotor and audiomotor tasks but age-related differences were greater in the lip than the finger. These results point to increased variability as a potential early marker of changing motor function (prior to loss of strength) that extends beyond the visuomotor system.

show abstract

“…However, we have not observed the increase in the duration of task in compromised sensory conditions due to local anesthesia in the current study. It is suggested that the two systems (i.e., trigeminal and spinal system) can have several inherent differences wherein visual feedback is available in the hand motor tasks and absent during oral tasks32. Studies have emphasized that role of visual feedback as one of the important modality for optimizing performance3334.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perturbed oral motor control due to anesthesia during intraoral manipulation of food

Grigoriadis

Kumar

Svensson

et al. 2017

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sensory information from periodontal mechanoreceptors (PMRs) surrounding the roots of natural teeth is important for optimizing the positioning of food and adjustment of force vectors during precision biting. The present experiment was designed to test the hypothesis; that reduction of afferent inputs from the PMRs, by anesthesia, perturbs the oral fine motor control and related jaw movements during intraoral manipulation of morsels of food. Thirty healthy volunteers with a natural dentition were equally divided into experimental and control groups. The participants in both groups were asked to manipulate and split a spherical candy into two equal halves with the front teeth. An intervention was made by anesthetizing the upper and lower incisors of the experimental group while the control group performed the task without intervention. Performance of the split was evaluated and the jaw movement recorded. The experimental group demonstrated a significant decrease in measures of performance following local anesthesia. However, there was no significant changes in the duration or position of the jaw during movements in the experimental and control group. In conclusion, transient deprivation of sensory information from PMRs perturbs oral fine motor control during intraoral manipulation of food, however, no significant alterations in duration or positions of the jaw during movements can be observed.

show abstract

The precision of motor control in human jaw and limb muscles during isometric contraction in the presence of visual feedback

Cited by 19 publications

References 5 publications

Altered control of submaximal bite force during bruxism in humans

Altered control of submaximal bite force during bruxism in humans

Aging Effects on Sensorimotor Integration: A Comparison of Effector Systems and Feedback Modalities

Perturbed oral motor control due to anesthesia during intraoral manipulation of food

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About