Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain! trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 523 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal. Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.

Monday, November 11, 2019

Imagining is not doing but involves specific motor commands: A review of experimental data related to motor inhibition

But all the words you use here are worthless to survivors. NOTHING EVEN CLOSE TO A PROTOCOL. WHEN THE HELL WILL YOU DO SOMETHING USEFUL FOR SURVIVORS?

Oops, I'm not playing by the polite rules of Dale Carnegie,  'How to Win Friends and Influence People'. 
Politeness will never solve anything in stroke.  I call them as I see them. I would have them fired. 

Imagining is not doing but involves specific motor commands: A review of experimental data related to motor inhibition

Aymeric Guillot
1,2
*, Franck Di Rienzo
1
,Tadhg MacIntyre
3
,Aidan Moran
4
and  Christian Collet
1
1
Centre de Recherche et d’Innovation sur le Sport (EA 647), équipe Performance Motrice, Mentale et du Matériel, Université de Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1,Villeurbanne, France
2
Institut Universitaire de France, Paris, France
3
Physical Education and Sport Sciences Department, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland
4
School of Psychology, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
Edited by:
Joel Pearson,The University of New SouthWale, Australia
Reviewed by:
Stephanie D. Preston, University of Michigan, USAYoshikazu Ugawa, Fukushima Medical Universtiy, Japan
*Correspondence:
Aymeric Guillot, Centre de Recherche et d’Innovation sur le Sport,Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1,27-29 Boulevard du 11 Novembre 1918, 69622Villeurbanne Cedex,France.e-mail:  aymeric.guillot@univ-lyon1.fr
There is now compelling evidence that motor imagery (MI) and actual movement share common neural substrate. However, the question of how MI inhibits the transmission of motor commands into the efferent pathways in order to prevent any movement is largely unresolved. Similarly, little is known about the nature of the electromyographic activity that is apparent during MI. In addressing these gaps in the literature, the present paper argues that MI includes motor execution commands for muscle contractions which are blocked at some level of the motor system by inhibitory mechanisms. We first assemble data from neuroimaging studies that demonstrate that the neural networks mediating MI and motor performance are not totally overlapping, thereby highlighting potential differences between MI and actual motor execution. We then review MI data indicating the presence of subliminal muscular activity reflecting the intrinsic characteristics of the motor command as well as increased corticomotor excitability. The third section not only considers the inhibitory mechanisms involved during MI but also examines how the brain resolves the problem of issuing the motor command for action while supervising motor inhibition when people engage involuntary movement during MI.The last part of the paper draws on imagery research in clinical contexts to suggest that some patients move while imagining an action, although they are not aware of such movements. In particular, experimental data from amputees as well as from patients with Parkinson’s disease are discussed. We also review recent studies based on comparing brain activity in tetraplegic patients with that from healthy matched controls that provide insights into inhibitory processes during MI. We conclude by arguing that based on available evidence, a multifactorial explanation of motor inhibition during MI is warranted.

No comments:

Post a Comment