Where is my hand? Proprioceptive disturbances in posterior cortical atrophy and typical Alzheimer’s disease
Background Posterior cortical atrophy (PCA) is a neurodegenerative syndrome most commonly caused by Alzheimer’s disease (AD) pathology. PCA is often considered the canonical ‘visual dementia’, characterised by the progressive loss of visual and posterior cortical functions corresponding to parieto‐o...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Alzheimer's & dementia 2023-12, Vol.19 (S18), p.n/a |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Background
Posterior cortical atrophy (PCA) is a neurodegenerative syndrome most commonly caused by Alzheimer’s disease (AD) pathology. PCA is often considered the canonical ‘visual dementia’, characterised by the progressive loss of visual and posterior cortical functions corresponding to parieto‐occipital and occipito‐temporal atrophy. However, patient reports of difficulties finding sleeves of clothes, transferring between postures and determining heading direction imply non‐visual disturbances, consistent with the multisensory role of the posterior parietal cortex. Such reports raise questions regarding AD clinical heterogeneity, representing a substantial challenge to patients' independence and management of PCA and typical AD (tAD).
Method
Patient (total n = 39; PCA n = 23; tAD n = 16) and control (n = 19) participants repeatedly reached to a proprioceptive target (their non‐dominant thumb) (Fig.A) with and without vision and tactile feedback (n = 40 trials per participant). The target was positioned passively behind a screen apparatus at five positions using an adjustable foam handrest. The primary outcome measure was absolute (medio‐lateral) error determined using whole‐body motion capture data (Fig.B).
Result
Absolute error was greater without than with vision across groups. However, the effect of removing vision on absolute error was smallest in the control group (estimated mean error with vision [95%CI]: 15mm [6,25]; without vision: 23mm [14,32]), greatest in PCA (with vision: 39mm [30,49]; without vision: 76mm [67,86]) and intermediate in the tAD group (with vision: 26mm [16,37]; without vision: 49mm [39,60]) (vision‐by‐group interaction: p |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1552-5260 1552-5279 |
DOI: | 10.1002/alz.078191 |