The leading joint hypothesis for spatial reaching arm motions

The leading joint hypothesis (LJH), developed for planar arm reaching, proposes that the interaction torques experienced by the proximal joint are low compared to the corresponding muscle torques. The human central nervous system could potentially ignore these interaction torques at the proximal (leading) joint with little effect on the wrist trajectory, simplifying joint-level control. This paper investigates the extension of the LJH to spatial reaching. In spatial motion, a number of terms in the governing equation (Euler’s angular momentum balance) that vanish for planar movements are non-trivial, so their contributions to the joint torque must be classified as net, interaction or muscle torque. This paper applies definitions from the literature to these torque components to establish a general classification for all terms in Euler’s equation. This classification is equally applicable to planar and spatial motion. Additionally, a rationale for excluding gravity torques from the torque analysis is provided. Subjects performed point-to-point reaching movements between targets whose locations ensured that the wrist paths lay in various portions of the arm’s spatial workspace. Movement kinematics were recorded using electromagnetic sensors located on the subject’s arm segments and thorax. The arm was modeled as a three-link kinematic chain with idealized spherical and revolute joints at the shoulder and elbow. Joint torque components were computed using inverse dynamics. Most movements were ‘shoulder-led’ in that the interaction torque impulse was significantly lower than the muscle torque impulse for the shoulder, but not the elbow. For the few elbow-led movements, the interaction impulse at the elbow was low, while that at the shoulder was high, and these typically involved large elbow and small shoulder displacements. These results support the LJH and extend it to spatial reaching motion.     

Control of 3D limb dynamics in unconstrained overarm throws of different speeds performed by skilled baseball players

This study investigated how the human CNS organizes complex three-dimensional (3D) ball-throwing movements that require both speed and accuracy. Skilled baseball players threw a baseball to a target at three different speeds. Kinematic analysis revealed that the fingertip speed at ball release was mainly produced by trunk leftward rotation, shoulder internal rotation, elbow extension, and wrist flexion in all speed conditions. The study participants adjusted the angular velocities of these four motions to throw the balls at three different speeds. We also analyzed the dynamics of the 3D multijoint movements using a recently developed method called "nonorthogonal torque decomposition" that can clarify how angular acceleration about a joint coordinate axis (e.g., shoulder internal rotation) is generated by the muscle, gravity, and interaction torques. We found that the study participants utilized the interaction torque to generate larger angular velocities of the shoulder internal rotation, elbow extension, and wrist flexion. To increase the interaction torque acting at these joints, the ball throwers increased muscle torque at the shoulder and trunk but not at the elbow and wrist. These results indicates that skilled ball throwers adopted a hierarchical control in which the proximal muscle torques created a dynamic foundation for the entire limb motion and beneficial interaction torques for distal joint rotations.     

Deliberate utilization of interaction torques brakes elbow extension in a fast throwing motion

We tested the hypothesis that in fast arm movements the CNS deliberately utilizes interaction torques to decelerate (brake) joint rotations. Twelve subjects performed fast 2-D overarm throws in which large elbow extension velocities occurred. Joint motions were computed from recordings made with search coils; joint torques were calculated using inverse dynamics. After ball release, a large follow-through shoulder extension acceleration occurred that was initiated by shoulder extensor muscle torque. This shoulder acceleration produced a flexor interaction torque at the elbow that initiated elbow deceleration (braking). An instantaneous mechanical interaction of passive torques then occurred between elbow and shoulder, i.e., elbow extension deceleration produced a large shoulder extensor interaction torque that contributed to the shoulder extension acceleration which, simultaneously, produced a large elbow flexor interaction torque that contributed to elbow extension deceleration, and so on. Late elbow flexor muscle torque also contributed to elbow deceleration. The interaction of passive torques between shoulder and elbow was braked by shoulder flexor muscle torque. In this mechanism, shoulder musculature contributed to braking elbow extension in two ways: shoulder extensors initiated the mechanical interaction of passive torques between shoulder and elbow and shoulder flexors dissipated kinetic energy from elbow braking. It is concluded that, in fast 2-D throws, the CNS deliberately utilizes powerful interaction torques between shoulder and elbow to brake motion at the elbow.     

A novel shoulder–elbow mechanism for increasing speed in a multijoint arm movement

The speed of arm movements is normally increased by increasing agonist muscle activity, but in overarm throwing, an additional effect on speed may come from exploitation of interaction torques (a passive torque associated with motion at adjacent joints). We investigated how the central nervous system (CNS) controls interaction torques at the shoulder and elbow to increase speed in 2-D overarm throwing. Twelve experienced throwers made slow, medium, and fast 2-D throws in a parasagittal plane. Joint motions were computed from recordings made with search coils; joint torques were calculated using inverse dynamics. For slow and medium-speed throws, elbow extension was primarily produced by elbow muscle torque. For fast throws, there was an additional late-occurring elbow extensor interaction torque. Parceling out this elbow extension interaction torque revealed that it primarily arose from shoulder extension deceleration. Surprisingly, shoulder deceleration before ball release was not caused by shoulder flexor (antagonist) muscle torque. Rather, shoulder deceleration was produced by passive elbow-to-shoulder interaction torques that were primarily associated with elbow extension acceleration and velocity. It is concluded that when generating fast 2-D throws, the CNS utilized the arm’s biomechanical properties to increase ball speed. It did this by coordinating shoulder and elbow motions such that an instantaneous mechanical positive feedback occurred of interaction torques between shoulder and elbow before ball release. To what extent this mechanism is utilized in other fast multijoint arm movements remains to be determined.     

Reprogramming of muscle activation patterns at the wrist in compensation for elbow reaction torques during planar two-joint arm movements

The relationship between wrist kinematics, dynamics and the pattern of muscle activation were examined during a two-joint planar movement in which the two joints moved in opposite directions, i.e. elbow flexion/wrist extension and elbow extension/wrist flexion. Elbow movements (ranging from 10 to 70 deg) and wrist movements (ranging from 10 to 50 deg) were performed during a visual, step-tracking task in which subjects were required to attend to the initial and final angles at each joint. As the elbow amplitude increased, wrist movement duration increased and the wrist movement trajectories became quite variable. Analysis of the torques acting at the wrist joint showed that elbow movements produced reaction torques acting in the same direction as the intended wrist movement. Distinct patterns of muscle activation were observed at the wrist joint that were dependent on the relative magnitude of the elbow reaction torque in relation to the net wrist torque. When the magnitude of the elbow reaction torque was quite small, the wrist agonist was activated first. As the magnitude of the elbow reaction torque increased, activity in the wrist agonist decreased significantly. In conditions where the elbow reaction torque was much larger than the net wrist torque, the wrist muscle torque reversed direction to oppose the intended movement. This reversal of wrist muscle torque was directly associated with a change in the pattern of muscle activation where the wrist antagonist was activated prior to the wrist agonist. Our findings indicate that motion of the elbow joint is an important consideration in planning wrist movement. Specifically, the selection of muscle activation patterns at the wrist is dependent on the relative magnitude and direction of the elbow reaction torque in relation to the direction of wrist motion.     

Multijoint arm movements in cerebellar ataxia: Abnormal control of movement dynamics

In cerebellar ataxia, kinematic aberrations of multijoint movements are thought to originate from deficiencies in generating muscular torques that are adequate to control the mechanical consequences of dynamic interaction forces. At this point the exact mechanisms that lead to an abnormal control of interaction torques are not known. In principle, the generation of inadequate muscular torques may result from an impairment in generating sufficient levels of torques or from an inaccurate assessment and prediction of the mechanical consequences of movements of one limb segment on adjacent joints. We sought to differentiate the relative contribution of these two mechanisms and, therefore, analyzed intersegmental dynamics of multijoint pointing movements in healthy subjects and in patients with cerebellar degeneration. Unrestrained vertical arm movements were performed at three different target movement velocities and recorded using an optoelectronic tracking system. An inverse dynamics approach was employed to compute net joint torques, muscular torques, dynamic interaction torques and gravitational torques acting at the elbow and shoulder joint. In both groups, peak dynamic interaction forces and peak muscular forces were largest during fast movements. In contrast to normal subjects, patients produced hypermetric movements when executing fast movements. Hypermetric movements were associated with smaller peak muscular torques and smaller rates of torque change at elbow and shoulder joints. The patients’ deficit in generating appropriate levels of muscular force were prominent during two different phases of the pointing movement. Peak muscular forces at the elbow were reduced during the initial phase of the movement when simultaneous shoulder joint flexion generated an extensor influence upon the elbow joint. When attempting to terminate the movement, gravitational and dynamic interaction forces caused overshooting extension at the elbow joint. In normal subjects, muscular torque patterns at shoulder and elbow joint were synchronized in that peak flexor and extensor muscular torques occurred simultaneously at both joints. This temporal pattern of muscular torque generation at shoulder and elbow joint was preserved in patients. Our data suggest that an impairment in generating sufficient levels of phasic muscular torques significantly contributes to the patients’ difficulties in controlling the mechanical consequences of dynamic interaction forces during multijoint movements. Received: 28 October 1996 / Accepted: 30 September 1997     

Compensation for interaction torques during single- and multijoint limb movement

During multijoint limb movements such as reaching, rotational forces arise at one joint due to the motions of limb segments about other joints. We report the results of three experiments in which we assessed the extent to which control signals to muscles are adjusted to counteract these "interaction torques." Human subjects performed single- and multijoint pointing movements involving shoulder and elbow motion, and movement parameters related to the magnitude and direction of interaction torques were manipulated systematically. We examined electromyographic (EMG) activity of shoulder and elbow muscles and, specifically, the relationship between EMG activity and joint interaction torque. A first set of experiments examined single-joint movements. During both single-joint elbow (experiment 1) and shoulder (experiment 2) movements, phasic EMG activity was observed in muscles spanning the stationary joint (shoulder muscles in experiment 1 and elbow muscles in experiment 2). This muscle activity preceded movement and varied in amplitude with the magnitude of upcoming interaction torque (the load resulting from motion of the nonstationary limb segment). In a third experiment, subjects performed multijoint movements involving simultaneous motion at the shoulder and elbow. Movement amplitude and velocity at one joint were held constant, while the direction of movement about the other joint was varied. When the direction of elbow motion was varied (flexion vs. extension) and shoulder kinematics were held constant, EMG activity in shoulder muscles varied depending on the direction of elbow motion (and hence the sign of the interaction torque arising at the shoulder). Similarly, EMG activity in elbow muscles varied depending on the direction of shoulder motion for movements in which elbow kinematics were held constant. The results from all three experiments support the idea that central control signals to muscles are adjusted, in a predictive manner, to compensate for interaction torques-loads arising at one joint that depend on motion about other joints.     

Commonalities and differences in control of various drawing movements

Characteristics of control at the shoulder and elbow during nine types of drawing movements were studied in the present work. The task was to repetitively track a template, depicted on a horizontal table, with the index finger at a cyclic frequency of 1.5 Hz. The templates were a circle, four ovals and four lines of different orientations. The wrist was immobilized and the movement consisted of rotations at the shoulder and elbow joints. The studied movements varied in a wide range with respect to the amplitude of elbow and shoulder movements and relative phase between them. Kinetic analysis included analysis of torque signs, impulses, and timing. It demonstrated that the role of muscle torque in movement production was different at the two joints. During eight out of the nine movement types, the muscle torque at the shoulder accelerated and decelerated this joint and almost completely coped with the influence of the interactive torque arising from elbow motion. Conversely, interactive torque generated by shoulder motion played a dominant role in elbow acceleration and deceleration, whereas muscle torque at the elbow adjusted passive elbow movement to the various template shapes. EMG data were in agreement with the conclusions made from the kinetic analysis. Collectively, these data support the hypothesis that the two joints have different functions in movement production. The shoulder creates a foundation for motion of the entire arm through the interactive torque, and the elbow serves as a fine-tuner of the end-point movement. Control of the shoulder was similar across the eight movement types and the differences in the end-point path were provided by variations in elbow control. The two joints exchanged roles during one movement type, namely, drawing the line tilted right. During this movement, the elbow musculature generated motion at this joint and the shoulder musculature counteracted mechanical influence of this motion on the shoulder position. The findings suggest that during drawing movements, the control strategy exploits intersegmental dynamics of the shoulder-elbow mechanical linkage.     

Cerebellar ataxia: torque deficiency or torque mismatch between joints?

Prior work has shown that cerebellar subjects have difficulty adjusting for interaction torques that occur during multi-jointed movements. The purpose of this study was to determine whether this deficit is due to a general inability to generate sufficient levels of phasic torque inability or due to an inability to generate muscle torques that predict and compensate for interaction torques. A second purpose was to determine whether reducing the number of moving joints by external mechanical fixation could improve cerebellar subjects' targeted limb movements. We studied control and cerebellar subjects making elbow flexion movements to touch a target under two conditions: 1) a shoulder free condition, which required only elbow flexion, although the shoulder joint was unconstrained and 2) a shoulder fixed condition, where the shoulder joint was mechanically stabilized so it could not move. We measured joint positions of the arm in the sagittal plane and electromyograms (EMGs) of shoulder and elbow muscles. Elbow and shoulder torques were estimated using inverse dynamics equations. In the shoulder free condition, cerebellar subjects made greater endpoint errors (primarily overshoots) than did controls. Cerebellar subjects' overshoot errors were largely due to unwanted flexion at the shoulder. The excessive shoulder flexion resulted from a torque mismatch, where larger shoulder muscle torques were produced at higher rates than would be appropriate for a given elbow movement. In the shoulder fixed condition, endpoint errors of cerebellar subjects and controls were comparable. The improved accuracy of cerebellar subjects was accompanied by reduced shoulder flexor muscle activity. Most of the correct cerebellar trials in the shoulder fixed condition were movements made using only muscles that flex the elbow. Our findings suggest that cerebellar subjects' poor shoulder control is due to an inability to generate muscle torques that predict and compensate for interaction torques, and not due to a general inability to generate sufficient levels of phasic torque. In addition, reducing the number of muscles to be controlled improved cerebellar ataxia.     

Differences in control of limb dynamics during dominant and nondominant arm reaching

This study compares the coordination patterns employed for the left and right arms during rapid targeted reaching movements. Six right-handed subjects reached to each of three targets, designed to elicit progressively greater amplitude interaction torques at the elbow joint. All targets required the same elbow excursion (20 degrees ), but different shoulder excursions (5, 10, and 15 degrees, respectively). Movements were restricted to the shoulder and elbow and supported on a horizontal plane by a frictionless air-jet system. Subjects received visual feedback only of the final hand position with respect to the start and target locations. For motivation, points were awarded based on final position accuracy for movements completed within an interval of 400-600 ms. For all subjects, the right and left hands showed a similar time course of improvement in final position accuracy over repeated trials. After task adaptation, final position accuracy was similar for both hands; however, the hand trajectories and joint coordination patterns during the movements were systematically different. Right hand paths showed medial to lateral curvatures that were consistent in magnitude for all target directions, whereas the left hand paths had lateral to medial curvatures that increased in magnitude across the three target directions. Inverse dynamic analysis revealed substantial differences in the coordination of muscle and intersegmental torques for the left and right arms. Although left elbow muscle torque contributed largely to elbow acceleration, right arm coordination was characterized by a proximal control strategy, in which movement of both joints was primarily driven by the effects of shoulder muscles. In addition, right hand path direction changes were independent of elbow interaction torque impulse, indicating skillful coordination of muscle actions with intersegmental dynamics. In contrast, left hand path direction changes varied directly with elbow interaction torque impulse. These findings strongly suggest that distinct neural control mechanisms are employed for dominant and non dominant arm movements. However, whether interlimb differences in neural strategies are a consequence of asymmetric use of the two arms, or vice versa, is not yet understood. The implications for neural organization of voluntary movement control are discussed.     

Control of the wrist in three-joint arm movements to multiple directions in the horizontal plane

In a reaching movement, the wrist joint is subject to inertial effects from proximal joint motion. However, precise control of the wrist is important for reaching accuracy. Studies of three-joint arm movements report that the wrist joint moves little during point-to-point reaches, but muscle activities and kinetics have not yet been described across a range of movement directions. We hypothesized that to minimize wrist motion, muscle torques at the wrist must perfectly counteract inertial effects arising from proximal joint motion. Subjects were given no instructions regarding joint movement and were observed to keep the wrist nearly motionless during center-out reaches to directions throughout the horizontal plane. Consistent with this, wrist muscle torques exactly mirrored interaction torques, in contrast to muscle torques at proximal joints. These findings suggest that in this reaching task the nervous system chooses to minimize wrist motion by anticipating dynamic inertial effects. The wrist muscle torques were associated with a direction-dependent choice of muscles, also characterized by initial reciprocal activation rather than initial coactivation to stiffen the wrist joint. In a second experiment, the same pattern of muscle activities persisted even after many trials reaching with the wrist joint immobilized. These results, combined with similar features at the three joints, such as cosine-like tuning of muscle torques and of muscle onsets across direction, suggest that the nervous system uses similar rules for muscles at each joint, as part of one plan for the arm during a point-to-point reach.     

Utilization and compensation of interaction torques during ball-throwing movements

The manner in which the CNS deals with interaction torques at each joint in ball throwing was investigated by instructing subjects to throw a ball at three different speeds, using two (elbow and wrist) or three joints (shoulder, elbow, and wrist). The results indicated that the role of the muscle torque at the most proximal joint was to accelerate the most proximal joint and to produce the effect of interjoint interaction on the distal joints. In the three-joint throwing, shoulder muscle torque produced the assistive interaction torque for the elbow, which was effectively utilized to generate large elbow angular velocity when throwing fast. However, at the wrist, the muscle torque always counteracted the interaction torque. By this kinetic mechanism, the wrist angular velocity at the ball-release time was kept relatively constant irrespective of ball speed, which would lead to an accurate ball release. Thus it was concluded that humans can adjust the speed and accuracy of ball-throwing by utilizing interaction torque or compensating for it.     

Effects of inactivation of the anterior interpositus nucleus on the kinematic and dynamic control of multijoint movement

We previously showed that inactivating the anterior interpositus nucleus in cats disrupts prehension; paw paths, normally straight and accurate, become curved, hypometric, and more variable. In the present study, we determined the joint kinematic and dynamic origins of this impairment. Animals were restrained in a hammock and trained to reach and grasp a cube of meat from a narrow food well at varied heights; movements were monitored using the MacReflex analysis system. The anterior interpositus nucleus was inactivated by microinjection of the GABA agonist muscimol (0.25-0.5 microgram in 0.5 microliter saline). For each joint, we computed the torque due to gravity, inertial resistance (termed self torque), interjoint interactions (termed interaction torque), and the combined effects of active muscle contraction and passive soft tissue stretch (termed generalized muscle torque). Inactivation produced significant reductions in the amplitude, velocity, and acceleration of elbow flexion. However, these movements continued to scale normally with target height. Shoulder extension was reduced by inactivation but wrist angular displacement and velocity were not. Inactivation also produced changes in the temporal coordination between elbow, shoulder, and wrist kinematics. Dynamic analysis showed that elbow flexion both before and during inactivation was produced by the combined action of muscle and interaction torque, but that the timing depended on muscle torque. Elbow interaction and muscle torques were scaled to target height both before and during inactivation. Inactivation produced significant reductions in elbow flexor interaction and muscle torques. The duration of elbow flexor muscle torque was prolonged to compensate for the reduction in flexor interaction torque. Shoulder extension was produced by extensor interaction and muscle torques both before and during inactivation. Inactivation produced a reduction in shoulder extension, primarily by reduced interaction torque, but without compensation. Wrist plantarflexion, which occurred during elbow flexion, was driven by plantarflexor interaction and gravitational torques both before and during inactivation. Muscle torque acted in the opposite direction with a phase lead to restrain the plantarflexor interaction torque. During inactivation, there was a reduction in plantarflexor interaction torque and a loss of the phase lead of the muscle torque. Our findings implicate the C1/C3 anterior interpositus zone of the cerebellum in the anticipatory control of intersegmental dynamics during reaching, which zone is required for coordinating the motions of the shoulder and wrist with those of the elbow. In contrast, this cerebellar zone does not play a role in scaling the movement to match a target.     

Multijoint movement control in Parkinson's disease

Impairments in the performance of complex actions in Parkinson's disease (PD) patients are well documented. The aim of the present study was to investigate potential mechanisms that may be contributing to impaired movement performance in PD patients. PD patients and age-matched control subjects performed rapid pointing movements to a series of four tabletop targets. The height of the table was adjusted until the targets could be achieved with arm movements in the horizontal plane. The targets were arranged such that target 1 required elbow extension only and targets 2–4 required increasing amounts of horizontal shoulder flexion in addition to the elbow extension. While the control subjects accelerated and decelerated the elbow and shoulder joints simultaneously regardless of the target location, the PD patients decomposed motion during the acceleration phase by accelerating first the shoulder and then the elbow joint. For PD patients this decomposition of arm segments was associated with greater coactivation of the muscles about the elbow when elbow extension and shoulder flexion were simultaneously required (targets 2–4), in contrast to the single joint action. The control subjects decreased elbow joint coactivation while the patients increased it across the four targets. The resulting peak interaction torques at both the elbow and shoulder joints occurred relatively later for the PD patients. The coactivation patterns observed in PD patients may reduce the ability to take advantage of interaction torques and may also contribute to joint motion decomposition. Electronic Publication     

Kinetic and kinematic adaptation to anisotropic load

Different investigators have proposed that multi-joint arm movements are planned with respect to either the path of the hand or the forces and torques acting about the moving joints. In this experiment, we examined the kinematic and kinetic response of the motor system when a load was applied to the forearm, which reduced the natural anisotropy of the arm. We asked two questions: (1) when the movement path changes upon the introduction of the novel load, do muscle torques at the shoulder and elbow remain the same as they were before the load was applied? and (2) when the path is restored partially as the novel load is learned, do changes in muscle torque occur preferentially at one or the other joint? Participants performed rapid arm movements to a target with and without the novel load attached to their arm. Changes in hand path and muscle torque profiles were examined immediately after the application of the load and again following 30 practice trials. The introduction of the load increased the curvature of hand paths for each participant and resulted in changes in the magnitude and time course of muscle torque at both joints, although to a greater extent at the shoulder. After practice with the load, hand paths and elbow muscle torques resembled those produced with no load. Muscle torques produced at the shoulder, however, did not return to pre-load patterns. These observations provide support for the idea that movements are initiated by planned muscle torques and that as the movement proceeds muscle torques are regulated in order to produce hand paths that conform approximately to a kinematic plan.     

Influence of joint interactional effects on the coordination of planar two-joint arm movements

We have examined EMG-movement relations in two-joint planar arm movements to determine the influence of interactional torques on movement coordination. Explicitly defined combinations of elbow movements (ranging from 20 to 70°) and wrist movements (ranging from 20 to 40°) were performed during a visual, step-tracking task in which subjects were specifically required to attend to the initial and final angles at each joint. In all conditions the wrist and elbow rotated in the same direction, that is, flexion-flexion or extension-extension. Elbow movement kinematics were only slightly influenced by motion about the wrist. In contrast, the trajectory of the wrist movement was significantly influenced by uncompensated reaction torques resulting from movement about the elbow joint. At any given wrist amplitude, wrist movement duration increased and peak velocity decreased as elbow amplitude increased. In addition, as elbow amplitude increased, wrist movement on-set was progressively delayed relative to this elbow movement. Surprisingly, the changes between joint movement onsets were not accompanied by corresponding changes between agonist EMG onsets at the elbow and wrist joints. The mean difference in onset times between elbow and wrist agonists (22–30 ms) remained unchanged across conditions. In addition, a basic pattern of muscle activation that scaled with movement amplitude was observed at each joint. Phasic agonist activity at the wrist and elbow joints remained remarkably similar across conditions and thus the changes in joint movement onset could not be attributed to changes in the motor commands. Rather, the calculated torques from the averaged data showed that the difference in timing of joint movement onsets was influenced by joint interactional torques. These findings suggest that during simple two-joint planar movements of the elbow and the wrist joint, the central nervous system does not alter the basic motor commands at each joint and as a result the actual trajectory of each joint is determined by interactional torques.     

Inter-joint coupling strategy during adaptation to novel viscous loads in human arm movement

When arm movements are perturbed by a load, how does the nervous system adjust control signals to reduce error? While it has been shown that the nervous system is capable of compensating for the effects of limb dynamics and external forces, the strategies used to adapt to novel loads are not well understood. We used a robotic exoskeleton [kinesiological instrument for normal and altered reaching movements (KINARM)] to apply novel loads to the arm during single-joint elbow flexions in the horizontal plane (shoulder rotation was allowed). Loads varied in magnitude with the instantaneous velocity of elbow flexion, and were applied to the shoulder in experiment 1 (interaction loads) and the elbow in experiment 2 (direct loads). Initial exposure to both interaction and direct loads resulted in perturbations at both joints, even though the load was applied to only a single joint. Subjects tended to correct for the kinematics of the elbow joint while perturbations at the shoulder persisted. Electromyograms (EMGs) and computed muscle torque showed that subjects modified muscle activity at the elbow to reduce elbow positional deviations. Shoulder muscle activity was also modified; however, these changes were always in the same direction as those at the elbow. Current models of motor control based on inverse-dynamics calculations and force-control, as well as models based on positional control, predict an uncoupling of shoulder and elbow muscle torques for adaptation to these loads. In contrast, subjects in this study adopted a simple strategy of modulating the natural coupling that exists between elbow and shoulder muscle torque during single-joint elbow movements.     

Horizontal-plane arm movements with direction reversals performed by normal individuals and individuals with down syndrome

We examined the systematic variation in shoulder and elbow torque, as well as movement kinematics, for horizontal-plane arm movements with direction reversals performed by normal individuals and individuals with Down syndrome. Eight neurologically normal individuals and eight individuals with Down syndrome performed horizontal, planar reversal movements to four different target locations. The four locations of the targets were chosen such that there is a systematic increase in elbow interaction torque for each of the four different target locations. This systematic increase in interaction torque has previously been shown to lead to progressively larger movement reversal errors, and trajectories that do not show a sharp reversal of direction, for movements to and from the target in patients who have proprioceptive abnormalities. We computed joint torques at the elbow and shoulder and found a high correlation between elbow and shoulder torque for the neurologically normal subjects. The ratio of joint torques varied systematically with target location. These findings extend previously reported findings of a linear synergy between shoulder and elbow joints for a variety of point-to-point movements. There was also a correlation between elbow and shoulder torque in individuals with Down syndrome, but the magnitude of the correlation was less. The ratio of joint torques changed systematically with target direction in individuals with Down syndrome but was slightly different from the ratio observed for neurologically normal individuals. The difference in the ratio was caused by the generation of proportionately more elbow torque than shoulder torque. The fingertip path of individuals with Down syndrome showed a sharp reversal in moving toward and then away from the target. In this respect, they were similar to neurologically normal individuals but dissimilar to individuals with proprioceptive deficits. Finally, we observed that individuals with Down syndrome spend proportionately more time in the vicinity of the target than normal individuals. Collectively these results show that there is a systematic relationship between joint torques at the elbow and shoulder. This relationship is present for reversal movements and is also present in individuals with Down syndrome.     

Selection of muscles for initiation of planar,three-joint arm movements with different final orientations of the hand

Muscle activities and joint rotations were examined at the shoulder, elbow, and wrist joints for pointing movements to targets in the horizontal plane. In such movements, multiple arm configurations are possible for a given target location. Thus, starting from the same initial configuration and for the same target location in space, the joint excursions could be varied. When no constraints were placed on the final orientation of the hand, the choice of muscles initially activated at the wrist joint was consistent with a function to resist inertial effects of proximal segment motion on the wrist joint. When subjects were asked to produce different final orientations of the hand for the same target location, the initial choice of muscles at the three joints was preserved in most trials, whether wrist flexion or extension was required to reach the final hand orientation. The relative onset times of muscle activity at the different joints were also not correlated with wrist excursion. This suggests a predetermined initial selection of muscles that is related to target location, not to joint angular excursion. The fact that the required final hand orientation was nevertheless achieved suggests that the planning of these pointing movements is not a unitary process, but is comprised of two components: a fixed initial muscle selection for a given target location in space, and a selection appropriate for the required joint excursions.     

Coordination of multi-joint arm movements in cerebellar ataxia: Analysis of hand and angular kinematics

Kinematic abnormalities of fast multijoint movements in cerebellar ataxia include abnormally increased curvature of hand trajectories and an increased hand path and are thought to originate from an impairment in generating appropriate levels of muscle torques to support normal coordination between shoulder and elbow joints. Such a mechanism predicts that kinematic abnormalities are pronounced when fast movements are performed and large muscular torques are required. Experimental evidence that systematically explores the effects of increasing movement velocities on movement kinematics in cerebellar multijoint movements is limited and to some extent contradictory. We, therefore, investigated angular and hand kinematics of natural multijoint pointing movements in patients with cerebellar degenerative disorders and healthy controls. Subjects performed self-paced vertical pointing movements with their right arms at three different target velocities. Limb movements were recorded in three-dimensional space using a two-camera infrared tracking system. Differences between patients and healthy subjects were most prominent when the subjects performed fast movements. Peak hand acceleration and deceleration were similar to normals during slow and moderate velocity movements but were smaller for fast movements. While altering movement velocities had little or no effect on the length of the hand path and angular motion of elbow and shoulder joints in normal subjects, the patients exhibited overshooting motions (hypermetria) of the hand and at both joints as movement velocity increased. Hypermetria at one joint always accompanied hypermetria at the neighboring joint. Peak elbow angular deceleration was markedly delayed in patients compared with normals. Other temporal movement variables such as the relative timing of shoulder and elbow joint motion onsets were normal in patients. Kinematic abnormalities of multijoint arm movements in cerebellar ataxia include hypermetria at both the elbow and the shoulder joint and, as a consequence, irregular and enlarged paths of the hand, and they are marked with fast but not with slow movements. Our findings suggest that kinematic movement abnormalities that characterize cerebellar limb ataxia are related to an impairment in scaling movement variables such as joint acceleration and deceleration normally with movement speed. Most likely, increased hand paths and decomposition of movement during slow movements, as described earlier, result from compensatory mechanisms the patients may employ if maximum movement accuracy is required.