Abstract

For assessing tactile spatial resolution it has recently been recommended to use tactile acuity charts which follow the design principles of the Snellen letter charts for visual acuity and involve active touch. However, it is currently unknown whether acuity thresholds obtained with this newly developed psychophysical procedure are in accordance with established measures of tactile acuity that involve passive contact with fixed duration and control of contact force. Here we directly compared tactile acuity thresholds obtained with the acuity charts to traditional two-point and grating orientation thresholds in a group of young healthy adults. For this purpose, two types of charts, using either Braille-like dot patterns or embossed Landolt rings with different orientations, were adapted from previous studies. Measurements with the two types of charts were equivalent, but generally more reliable with the dot pattern chart. A comparison with the two-point and grating orientation task data showed that the test-retest reliability of the acuity chart measurements after one week was superior to that of the passive methods. Individual thresholds obtained with the acuity charts agreed reasonably with the grating orientation threshold, but less so with the two-point threshold that yielded relatively distinct acuity estimates compared to the other methods. This potentially considerable amount of mismatch between different measures of tactile acuity suggests that tactile spatial resolution is a complex entity that should ideally be measured with different methods in parallel. The simple test procedure and high reliability of the acuity charts makes them a promising complement and alternative to the traditional two-point and grating orientation thresholds.

Highlights

  • The availability of reliable and valid psychophysical measures of tactile spatial acuity is fundamental for areas as diverse as basic research on age- and experience-dependent plasticity of spatial processing in the somatosensory system [1,2,3,4,5], clinical assessment of sensory loss and recovery of function in patients with sustained nerve damage [6] or neurological diseases [7], and rehabilitation counseling for blind people [8], amongst others.The two-point threshold is probably the best-known method to evaluate the spatial resolution capacity of the skin, due to its prevalent mention in textbooks and reviews on the topic

  • Our results demonstrate that (a) quick and reliable measurements of tactile acuity can be achieved using only a few lines around the expected acuity limit, (b) variations in surface material of the charts do not have an impact on acuity measurements, and (c) charts using Braille-like dot patterns seem to be more reliable than charts using Landolt rings

  • The main study directly compared tactile acuity estimates obtained with the acuity charts with the more established twopoint and grating orientation thresholds within the same participants

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The availability of reliable and valid psychophysical measures of tactile spatial acuity is fundamental for areas as diverse as basic research on age- and experience-dependent plasticity of spatial processing in the somatosensory system [1,2,3,4,5], clinical assessment of sensory loss and recovery of function in patients with sustained nerve damage [6] or neurological diseases [7], and rehabilitation counseling for blind people [8], amongst others (see [9,10]).The two-point threshold is probably the best-known method to evaluate the spatial resolution capacity of the skin, due to its prevalent mention in textbooks and reviews on the topic (see [11,12]). It has been argued that the two-point threshold might not represent a valid measure of spatial acuity because participants were assumed to discriminate one from two points on the basis of intensity cues rather than spatial cues [11,13]. While this proposition is relevant at the level of peripheral nerve activity, recent studies focusing on cortical population activity provided evidence for a critical role of nonlinear lateral interaction processes with little evidence for differences in the magnitude of response [14,15]. Potential confounds in the GOT task are unknown contributions of visual cortical processing [18] and anisotropy of the task performance [19,20,21]

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call