Psychology Department, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Cortex. 2013 Jun;49(6):1694-703. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2012.08.017. Epub 2012 Sep 5.
In anosognosia for hemiplegia, patients may claim having performed willed actions with the paralyzed limb despite unambiguous evidence to the contrary. Does this false belief of having moved reflect the functioning of the same mechanisms that govern normal motor performance? Here, we examined whether anosognosics show the same temporal constraints known to exist during bimanual movements in healthy subjects. In these paradigms, when participants simultaneously reach for two targets of different difficulties, the motor programs of one hand affect the execution of the other. In detail, the movement time of the hand going to an easy target (i.e., near and large), while the other is going to a difficult target (i.e., far and small), is slowed with respect to unimanual movements (temporal coupling effect). One right-brain-damaged patient with left hemiplegia and anosognosia, six right-brain-damaged patients with left hemiplegia without anosognosia, and twenty healthy subjects were administered such a bimanual task. We recorded the movement times for easy and difficult targets, both in unimanual (one target) and bimanual (two targets) conditions. We found that, as healthy subjects, the anosognosic patient showed coupling effect. In bimanual asymmetric conditions (when one hand went to the easy target and the other went to the difficult target), the movement time of the non-paralyzed hand going to the easy target was slowed by the 'pretended' movement of the paralyzed hand going to the difficult target. This effect was not present in patients without anosognosia. We concluded that in anosognosic patients, the illusory movements of the paralyzed hand impose to the non-paralyzed hand the same motor constraints that emerge during the actual movements. Our data also support the view that coupling relies on central operations (i.e., activation of intention/programming system), rather than on online information from the periphery.
在单侧忽略性偏瘫中,尽管有明确的证据表明相反,患者可能会声称自己用瘫痪的肢体进行了有意愿的动作。这种关于已经移动的虚假信念是否反映了控制正常运动表现的相同机制的运作?在这里,我们检查了单侧忽略性偏瘫患者是否表现出与健康受试者双手动作中存在的相同时间限制。在这些范式中,当参与者同时到达两个不同难度的目标时,一只手的运动程序会影响另一只手的执行。具体来说,当一只手去一个容易的目标(即靠近且大),而另一只手去一个困难的目标(即远且小)时,其运动时间相对于单手运动(时间耦合效应)会变慢。一名右半球损伤伴有左侧偏瘫和单侧忽略性偏瘫的患者、六名右半球损伤伴有左侧偏瘫但无单侧忽略性偏瘫的患者和二十名健康受试者接受了这样的双手动任务。我们记录了容易和困难目标的运动时间,包括单手(一个目标)和双手(两个目标)条件。我们发现,像健康受试者一样,单侧忽略性偏瘫患者表现出耦合效应。在双手动不对称条件下(当一只手去容易的目标,另一只手去困难的目标),去容易目标的非瘫痪手的运动时间因去困难目标的瘫痪手的“假装”运动而变慢。这种效应在无单侧忽略性偏瘫的患者中不存在。我们得出结论,在单侧忽略性偏瘫患者中,瘫痪手的虚幻运动给非瘫痪手施加了与实际运动中出现的相同的运动限制。我们的数据还支持这样一种观点,即耦合依赖于中枢操作(即意图/编程系统的激活),而不是来自外围的在线信息。