HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 100/5/2577    most recent 90471.2008v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Damm, L. Articles by McIntyre, J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Damm, L. Articles by McIntyre, J.

Physiological Basis of Limb-Impedance Modulation During Free and Constrained Movements

Laboratoire de Physiologie de la Perception et de l'Action, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Collège de France; and Laboratoire de Neurobiologie des Réseaux Sensorimoteurs, CNRS UMR 7060, Université Paris Descartes, 75006 Paris, France

Submitted 15 April 2008; accepted in final form 17 August 2008

Arm stiffness is a critical factor underlying stable interactions with the environment. When the hand moves freely through space, a stiff limb would most effectively maintain the hand on the desired path in the face of external perturbations. Conversely, when constrained by a rigid surface, a compliant limb would allow the surface to guide the hand while minimizing variations in contact forces. We aimed to identify the physiological basis of stiffness adaptation for these two classes of movement. Stiffness can be regulated by two mechanisms: coactivation of antagonistic muscles and modulation of reflex gains. We hypothesized that subjects would select high stiffness (high coactivation and/or reflex gains) in free space and high compliance (low coactivation and reflex gains) for constrained movements. We measured EMG and the H-reflex during constrained and unconstrained movement of the wrist. As predicted, subjects coactivated antagonist muscles more when performing the unconstrained movement. Contrary to our hypothesis, however, H-reflex amplitude was higher for the constrained movement despite the a priori preference for lower reflex gains in this situation. In addition, the H-reflex depended on the task and the net force exerted by the limb on the environment, rather than showing a simple dependence on the level of muscle activation. Thus stiffness seems to increase in free space compared with constrained motion through the use of coactivation, whereas spinal loop gains are adjusted to better regulate the influence of afferences on the ongoing movement. These observations support the hypothesis of movement programming in terms of impedance.