Zhang Hong, Kumar Abhishek, Luo Xiaoping, Svensson Krister, Trulsson Mats, Svensson Peter
Department of Prosthodontics, Nanjing Stomatologic Hospital, Medical School of Nanjing University, China.
Division of Oral Diagnostics and Rehabilitation, Department of Dental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Sweden; Scandinavian Center for Orofacial Neuroscience (SCON), Denmark.
Hum Mov Sci. 2018 Apr;58:132-139. doi: 10.1016/j.humov.2018.01.013. Epub 2018 Feb 6.
We hypothesized that the trigeminally innervated jaw muscles and spinally innervated hand muscles would differ in the force control and muscle activity when similar fine motor training tasks are performed. Sixteen healthy volunteers performed six series (with ten trials each) of an oral fine motor task (OFMT) and a hand fine motor task (HFMT), in random order. The task was to hold-and-break a test material (5 cm spaghetti pasta) placed on the force transducer between either their anterior teeth (OFMT) or the thumb and the index finger (HFMT). The hold and the break forces along with the electromyographic (EMG) activity of the left and right masseter (MAL and MAR), left anterior temporalis (TAL) and digastric (DIG) muscles during OFMT, and first dorsal interosseous (FDI) and abductor pollicis brevis (APB) during HFMT, were recorded. There was no significant difference in the relative change of holding force during the six subsequent series, neither for the OFMT (P = 0.39) nor for the HFMT (P = 0.10). The relative change of EMG activity of MAL (P = 0.01) and MAR (P = 0.02) during the hold phase decreased significantly during the six series of OFMT. Also the relative change of break force (P = 0.001) and the relative change of EMG activity of APB during the hold (P = 0.003) and break phases (P = 0.002) decreased significantly during the six series of HFMT. The results indicate functional differences between the jaw and hand muscles during a similar hold-and-break task, with the most pronounced changes for the spinally innervated hand muscles. Overall, these findings indicate that training-related neuroplasticity cannot be extrapolated directly from the spinal to the trigeminal system and vice versa.
我们假设，当执行类似的精细运动训练任务时，由三叉神经支配的颌部肌肉和由脊髓神经支配的手部肌肉在力量控制和肌肉活动方面会有所不同。16名健康志愿者以随机顺序进行了六个系列（每个系列十次试验）的口腔精细运动任务（OFMT）和手部精细运动任务（HFMT）。任务是用前牙（OFMT）或拇指与食指（HFMT）夹住并折断放置在力传感器上的测试材料（5厘米长的意大利面条）。记录了OFMT期间左右咬肌（MAL和MAR）、左颞肌前束（TAL）和二腹肌（DIG）的夹持力和折断力以及肌电图（EMG）活动，以及HFMT期间第一背侧骨间肌（FDI）和拇短展肌（APB）的活动。在随后的六个系列中，夹持力的相对变化没有显著差异，OFMT（P = 0.39）和HFMT（P = 0.10）均如此。在六个系列的OFMT中，夹持阶段MAL（P = 0.01）和MAR（P = 0.02）的EMG活动相对变化显著降低。在六个系列的HFMT中，折断力的相对变化（P = 0.001）以及夹持（P = 0.003）和折断阶段（P = 0.002）APB的EMG活动相对变化也显著降低。结果表明，在类似的夹持和折断任务中，颌部肌肉和手部肌肉存在功能差异，脊髓神经支配的手部肌肉变化最为明显。总体而言，这些发现表明，与训练相关的神经可塑性不能直接从脊髓系统推断到三叉神经系统，反之亦然。
