directly interferes with muscle strength recovery as patients are often unable to neurologically engage (eg, fully contact) their muscle during exercise. 6 This diminished ability to fully contract the musculature surrounding an injured joint, termed arthrogenic muscle inhibition (AMI), is a common
Search Results
Nicholas W. Baumgartner, Anne M. Walk, Caitlyn G. Edwards, Alicia R. Covello, Morgan R. Chojnacki, Ginger E. Reeser, Andrew M. Taylor, Hannah D. Holscher, and Naiman A. Khan
encompasses cognitive processes that are thought to drive goal-directed behavior. 17 The core processes thought to comprise cognitive control include attentional inhibition (the ability to resist distractions to maintain focus); working memory (the ability to store, maintain, and manipulate information to be
Linda Paschen, Tim Lehmann, Miriam Kehne, and Jochen Baumeister
monitoring of complex, goal-directed processes involved in perception, memory, and action ( 10 , 13 ). The 3 interrelated and interacting core domains of EF are inhibition, working memory, and cognitive flexibility ( 9 , 10 ). In this context, inhibition describes a deliberate suppression of distracting
Ines Pfeffer and Tilo Strobach
, 2012 ; Miyake et al., 2000 ) systematized the complexity of different situations and processes involving the executive function construct primarily in three domains: inhibition , updating , and shifting . Inhibition is related to deliberate overriding of dominant or prepotent responses, updating
Sanne L.C. Veldman, Rachel A. Jones, Rebecca M. Stanley, Dylan P. Cliff, Stewart A. Vella, Steven J. Howard, Anne-Maree Parrish, and Anthony D. Okely
(Mr. Ant), inhibition (Go/No-Go), and shifting (Card-Sorting). These measures were designed to be brief (∼5 min) and engaging. In Mr Ant, working memory was assessed by asking the children to remember the spatial locations of an increasing number of stickers placed on a cartoon ant, and then to
Jane Jie Yu, Chia-Liang Tsai, Chien-Yu Pan, Ru Li, and Cindy Hui-Ping Sit
study found that inhibition was significantly strengthened in young children who had received a PA intervention. 10 As one feature of executive function, inhibition in the attention process is a higher level function to resolve the conflict among visual stimuli and inhibit task-inappropriate responses
Grant Norte, Justin Rush, and David Sherman
, there appears to be a “disconnect” between what they want to do and what they can do. This common clinical scenario reflects an underlying neurophysiological phenomenon known as arthrogenic muscle inhibition (AMI) in which otherwise healthy muscle becomes reflexively inhibited following an injury to
Justin L. Rush, David A. Sherman, David M. Bazett-Jones, Christopher D. Ingersoll, and Grant E. Norte
patients have concluded extensive rehabilitation protocols, 3 suggesting a missing piece in clinical practice. Patients with joint injuries may experience arthrogenic muscle inhibition (AMI), a neurophysiological response to joint trauma that can impede muscular recovery. AMI is described as a reflexive
Shawn R. Eagle, Patrick J. Sparto, Cynthia L. Holland, Abdulaziz A. Alkathiry, Nicholas A. Blaney, Hannah B. Bitzer, Michael W. Collins, Joseph M. Furman, and Anthony P. Kontos
from the correct posture, over the 20-second period. Dual-Task Test Procedures. The cognitive portion of the dual task was adapted from the motor and perceptual inhibition test. First, each participant completed a visual–spatial discrimination forced choice test (VSD), where participants responded to a
Steve Hansen, James L. Lyons, and Katherine M. Keetch
This study examined the performance of the upper limbs during responses to previously cued and un-cued locations. Participants made unimanual and bimanual responses under homologous and non-homologous muscular control, within a cuetarget (Experiment 1; n = 10), and a target-target (Experiment 2; n = 10) aiming protocol. The inhibition of return (IOR) to a target location was expected to increase with (a) an increase in the organization of the movement response required, and (b) the decrease in the muscular coupling under which the bimanual movement was performed. IOR was observed in both experiments when participants completed their movements in either the unimanual or homologous conditions, but not in the non-homologous condition. In addition, reaction times were significantly shorter when a movement preceded the response than when no manual response was made to the initial visual cue. The results indicate that common processing delays in response to exogenously cued targets are dependent on the muscular control of those responses. Thus, this study provides evidence that IOR is moderated by the muscular control under which the bimanual movement was performed indicating an influential involvement of the motor system in both the movement planning and movement response to multiple target stimuli.
