The Vividness of Motor Imagery Is Correlated With Corticospinal Excitability During Combined Motor Imagery and Action Observation.

Takefumi Moriuchi,Akira Nakashima,Takashi Hasegawa,Keita Nishi,Wataru Mitsunaga,Takashi Matsuo,Naoki Iso,Kimika Anan,Toshio Higashi,Jiro Nakamura

doi:10.3389/fnhum.2020.581652

Takefumi Moriuchi, Akira Nakashima + Show 8 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2020.581652

Copy DOI

Abstract

The present study aimed to investigate the relationship between motor imagery (MI) assessment (ability and quality) and neurophysiological assessment [transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS)-induced motor-evoked potentials (MEPs)] during combined MI and action observation (AO; MI + AO). Sixteen subjects completed an MI task playing the piano with both hands, and neurophysiological assessment was performed during the MI task. The Movement Imagery Questionnaire-Revised was adopted to evaluate MI ability, while the visual analogue scale (VAS) was adopted to evaluate MI quality. A TMS pulse was delivered during the MI task, and MEPs were subsequently recorded in the abductor pollicis brevis (APB). We found a significant positive correlation between the VAS score and the TMS-induced MEPs (ρ = 0.497, p < 0.001). These findings suggest that the VAS score could potentially reflect the corticospinal excitability during MI + AO, particularly in complex MI tasks.

Highlights

Motor imagery (MI) is defined as a ‘‘mental simulation’’ or ‘‘mental rehearsal’’ of movement without any actual body movement (Jeannerod, 1994; Jeannerod and Decety, 1995; Decety, 1996)
Post hoc analysis revealed that motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) recorded from the abductor pollicis brevis (APB) in the timing of ‘‘striking a C note with a thumb’’ significantly increased compared to the timing of ‘‘striking a G note with a little finger.’’ MEPs recorded from the abductor digiti minimi (ADM) in the timing of ‘‘striking a G note with a little finger’’ significantly increased compared to the timing of ‘‘striking a C note with a thumb.’’ From these results, the present study revealed the muscle-specific modulation of MEP amplitudes during MI + action observation (AO), in line with a previous study (Stinear and Byblow, 2003)
To reveal which assessment reflects the outcome of the neurophysiological assessment, as supplementary data for accuracy of results, we investigated the various relationships among MI ability assessment, MI quality assessment, and neurophysiological assessment

Summary

Introduction

Motor imagery (MI) is defined as a ‘‘mental simulation’’ or ‘‘mental rehearsal’’ of movement without any actual body movement (Jeannerod, 1994; Jeannerod and Decety, 1995; Decety, 1996). There have been several studies related to MI using neuroimaging technology and neurophysiological methods In these studies, as supplementary data for accuracy of results, it is considered important to show the subject’s MI ability to form and control accurate mental images of movement and the quality and vividness of their image of the motor act (Guillot and Collet, 2005; Sharma et al, 2006). We defined ‘‘MI ability assessment’’ as that which evaluates the subject’s MI ability with a task that is different from the task to be learned in MI training. We defined ‘‘MI quality assessment’’ as that which evaluates how vividly the MI task learned during MI training was performed

Methods

Results

Conclusion