4.7 Article

Sensorimotor incongruence triggers sensory disturbances in professional violinists: an experimental study

期刊

RHEUMATOLOGY
卷 49, 期 7, 页码 1281-1289

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/keq067

关键词

Sensorimotor conflict; Anomalous sensory changes; Professional violinists

资金

  1. Royal Conservatory, Artesis University College Antwerp, Belgium

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives. Professional violinists are at increased risk of developing disabling symptoms, such as tightness, stiffness, cramps, swelling and numbness in the upper limbs. In the majority of the symptoms, a demonstrable nociceptive aetiology cannot be defined. It has been suggested that a conflict between sensory input and motor intention can generate sensory disturbances. The purpose of this study was (i) to examine whether a sensorimotor conflict triggers sensory changes in professional violinists and (ii) to determine whether a conflict between motor intention and sensory feedback contributes to pathological symptoms in professional violinists. Method. Twenty students following a professional master education in violin performed a coordination task simulating sensorimotor incongruence. Sensory changes were reported and rated after each stage of the protocol. Results. Twelve (60%) violinists reported sensory changes at some stage in the test protocol. The maximum number of reports of sensory changes occurred when the subjects moved their arms incongruently viewing the mirror (i. e. the stage of the protocol with the highest level of sensorimotor conflict). During performance of the coordination task viewing the mirror, a significant difference in sensory changes between violinists with and without baseline symptoms was revealed (P = 0.012 and P = 0.025). Conclusion. Violinists with baseline symptoms may have a reduced threshold for sensorimotor incongruence. A conflict between the efferent motor output and the afferent sensorimotor input may play a role in symptoms without a discernible or local nociceptive aetiology in violinists. Further research is required.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据