Cortical activation during executed, imagined, observed, and passive wrist movements in healthy volunteers and stroke patients

Motor imagery, passive movement, and movement observation have been suggested to activate the sensorimotor system without overt movement. The present study investigated these three covert movement modes together with overt movement in a within-subject design to allow for a fine-grained comparison of their abilities in activating the sensorimotor system, i.e. premotor, primary motor, and somatosensory cortices. For this, 21 healthy volunteers underwent functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). In addition we explored the abilities of the different covert movement modes in activating the sensorimotor system in a pilot study of 5 stroke patients suffering from chronic severe hemiparesis. Results demonstrated that while all covert movement modes activated sensorimotor areas, there were profound differences between modes and between healthy volunteers and patients. In healthy volunteers, the pattern of neural activation in overt execution was best resembled by passive movement, followed by motor imagery, and lastly by movement observation. In patients, attempted overt execution was best resembled by motor imagery, followed by passive movement and lastly by movement observation. Our results indicate that for severely hemiparetic stroke patients motor imagery may be the preferred way to activate the sensorimotor system without overt behavior. In addition, the clear differences between the covert movement modes point to the need for within-subject comparisons. (C) 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Visual impairment in children with spastic cerebral palsy measured by psychophysical and electrophysiological grating acuity tests

Background: This study measured grating visual acuity in 173 children between 6-48 months of age who had different types of spastic cerebral palsy (CP). Method: Behavioural acuity was measured with the Teller Acuity Cards (TAC) using a staircase psychophysical procedure. Electrophysiological visual acuity was estimated using the sweep VEP (sVEP). Results: The percentage of children outside the superior tolerance limits was 44 of 63 (69%) and 50 of 55 (91%) of tetraplegic, 36 of 56 (64%) and 42 of 53 (79%) of diplegic, 10 of 48 (21%) and 12 of 40 (30%) of hemiplegic for sVEP and TAC, respectively. For the sVEP, the greater visual acuity deficit found in the tetraplegic group was significantly different from that of the hemiplegic group (p < 0.001). In the TAC procedure the mean visual acuity deficits of the tetraplegic and diplegic groups were significantly different from that of hemiplegic group (p < 0.001). The differences between sVEP and TAC means of visual acuity difference were statistically significant for the tetraplegic (p < 0.001), diplegic (p < 0.001), and hemiplegic group (p = 0.004). Discussion: Better visual acuities were obtained in both procedures for hemiplegic children compared to diplegic or tetraplegic. Tetraplegic and diplegic children showed greater discrepancies between the TAC and sVEP results. Inter-ocular acuity difference was more frequent in sVEP measurements. Conclusions: Electrophysiologically measured visual acuity is better than behavioural visual acuity in children with CP.