Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Elbow Joint/physiology”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

4 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2003

Coordinated turn-and-reach movements. II. Planning in an external frame of reference

The preceding study demonstrated that normal subjects compensate for the additional interaction torques generated when a reaching movement is made during voluntary trunk rotation. The present paper assesses the influence of trunk rotation on finger trajectories and on interjoint coordination and determines whether simultaneous turn-and-reach movements are most simply described relative to a trunk-based or an external reference frame. Subjects reached to targets requiring different extents of arm joint and trunk rotation at a natural pace and quickly in normal lighting and in total darkness. We first examined whether the larger interaction torques generated during rapid turn-and-reach movements perturb finger trajectories and interjoint coordination and whether visual feedback plays a role in compensating for these torques. These issues were addressed using generalized Procrustes analysis (GPA), which attempts to overlap a group of configurations (e.g., joint trajectories) through translations and rotations in multi-dimensional space. We first used GPA to identify the mean intrinsic patterns of finger and joint trajectories (i.e., their average shape irrespective of location and orientation variability in the external and joint workspaces) from turn-and-reach movements performed in each experimental condition and then calculated their curvatures. We then quantified the discrepancy between each finger or joint trajectory and the intrinsic pattern both after GPA was applied individually to trajectories from a pair of experimental conditions and after GPA was applied to the same trajectories pooled together. For several subjects, joint trajectories but not finger trajectories were more curved in fast than slow movements. The curvature of both joint and finger trajectories of turn-and-reach movements was relatively unaffected by the vision conditions. Pooling across speed conditions significantly increased the discrepancy between joint but not finger trajectories for most subjects, indicating that subjects used different patterns of interjoint coordination in slow and fast movements while nevertheless preserving the shape of their finger trajectory. Higher movement speeds did not disrupt the arm joint rotations despite the larger interaction torques generated. Rather, subjects used the redundant degrees of freedom of the arm/trunk system to achieve similar finger trajectories with differing joint configurations. We examined finger movement patterns and velocity profiles to determine the frame of reference in which turn-and-reach movements could be most simply described. Finger trajectories of turn-and-reach movements had much larger curvatures and their velocity profiles were less smooth and less bell-like in trunk-based coordinates than in external coordinates. Taken together, these results support the conclusion that turn-and-reach movements are controlled in an external frame of reference.

NASA Discipline Neuroscience↗
NASA NTRS2003

Flexor bias of joint position in humans during spaceflight

The ability to estimate ankle and elbow joint position was tested before, during, and after a 17-day spaceflight. Subjects estimated targeted joint angles during isovelocity (IsoV) joint movements with agonist muscle groups either active or relaxed. These movements included elbow extension (EE) and elbow flexion (EF), and plantarflexion (PF) and dorsiflexion (DF) of the ankle. Subjects also estimated these joint positions while moving the dynamometer at their chosen (variable) velocity (VarV) during EE and PF. For IsoV tests, no differences were observed between active and passive movements for either the ankle or elbow. Compared with those of pre-flight test days, estimates of targeted elbow joint angles were approximately 5 degrees to 15 degrees more flexed in-flight, and returned toward the pre-flight values during recovery. The spaceflight effects for the ankle were inconsistent and less prevalent than those for the elbow. The VarV PF test condition for the 120 degrees target angle at the ankle exhibited approximately 5 degrees to 7 degrees more DF target angle estimates in-flight compared with those pre- or post-flight. In contrast, during IsoV PF there was a tendency for ankle estimates to be approximately 2 degrees to 3 degrees more PF after 2-3 days exposure to spaceflight. These data indicate that during spaceflight the perception of elbow extension is greater than actuality, and are consistent with the interpretation that microgravity induced a flexor bias in the estimation of the actual elbow joint position. Moreover, these effects in joint proprioception during spaceflight were observed in individual isolated single-joint movements during tasks in which vestibular function in maintaining posture were minimal.

STS-78 Shuttle Project↗
NASA NTRS2003

Coordinated turn-and-reach movements. I. Anticipatory compensation for self-generated coriolis and interaction torques

When reaching movements involve simultaneous trunk rotation, additional interaction torques are generated on the arm that are absent when the trunk is stable. To explore whether the CNS compensates for such self-generated interaction torques, we recorded hand trajectories in reaching tasks involving various amplitudes and velocities of arm extension and trunk rotation. Subjects pointed to three targets on a surface slightly above waist level. Two of the target locations were chosen so that a similar arm configuration relative to the trunk would be required for reaching to them, one of these targets requiring substantial trunk rotation, the other very little. Significant trunk rotation was necessary to reach the third target, but the arm's radial distance to the body remained virtually unchanged. Subjects reached at two speeds-a natural pace (slow) and rapidly (fast)-under normal lighting and in total darkness. Trunk angular velocity and finger velocity relative to the trunk were higher in the fast conditions but were not affected by the presence or absence of vision. Peak trunk velocity increased with increasing trunk rotation up to a maximum of 200 degrees /s. In slow movements, peak finger velocity relative to the trunk was smaller when trunk rotation was necessary to reach the targets. In fast movements, peak finger velocity was approximately 1.7 m/s for all targets. Finger trajectories were more curved when reaching movements involved substantial trunk rotation; however, the terminal errors and the maximal deviation of the trajectory from a straight line were comparable in slow and fast movements. This pattern indicates that the larger Coriolis, centripetal, and inertial interaction torques generated during rapid reaches were compensated by additional joint torques. Trajectory characteristics did not vary with the presence or absence of vision, indicating that visual feedback was unnecessary for anticipatory compensations. In all reaches involving trunk rotation, the finger movement generally occurred entirely during the trunk movement, indicating that the CNS did not minimize Coriolis forces incumbent on trunk rotation by sequencing the arm and trunk motions into a turn followed by a reach. A simplified model of the arm/trunk system revealed that additional interaction torques generated on the arm during voluntary turning and reaching were equivalent to < or =1.8 g (1 g = 9.81 m/s(2)) of external force at the elbow but did not degrade performance. In slow-rotation room studies involving reaching movements during passive rotation, Coriolis forces as small as 0.2 g greatly deflect movement trajectories and endpoints. We conclude that compensatory motor innervations are engaged in a predictive fashion to counteract impending self-generated interaction torques during voluntary reaching movements.

NASA Discipline Neuroscience↗
NASA NTRS1993

Gravitoinertial force level influences arm movement control

1. The ability to move the forearm between remembered elbow joint angles immediately after rapid increases or decreases of the background gravitoinertial force (G) level was measured. The movements had been well-practiced in a normal 1G environment before the measurements in high-(1.8G) and low-force (0G) environments. The forearm and upper arm were always unsupported to maximize the influence of altered G-loading and to minimize extraneous cues about arm position. 2. Horizontal and vertical movement planes were studied to measure the effects of varying the G load in the movement plane within a given G background. Rapid and slow movements were studied to assess the role of proprioceptive feedback. 3. G level did not affect the amplitude of rapid movements, indicating that subjects were able to plan and to generate appropriate motor commands for the new G loading of the arm. The amplitude of slow movements was affected by G level, indicating that proprioceptive feedback is influenced by G level. 4. The effects of G level were similar for horizontal and vertical movements, indicating that proprioceptive information from supporting structures, such as the shoulder joint and muscles, had a role in allowing generation of the appropriate motor commands. 5. The incidence and size of dynamic overshoots were greater in 0G and for rapid movements. This G-related change in damping suggests a decrease in muscle spindle activity in 0G. A decrease in muscle spindle activity in 0G and an increase in 1.8G are consistent with the results of our prior studies on the tonic vibration reflex, locomotion, and perception of head movement trajectory in varying force backgrounds.

NASA Program Space Physiology and Countermeasures↗