Motor imagery and electrical stimulation reproduce corticospinal excitability at levels similar to voluntary muscle contraction
The combination of voluntary effort and functional electrical stimulation (ES) appears to have a greater potential to induce plasticity in the motor cortex than either electrical stimulation or voluntary training alone. However, it is not clear whether the motor commands from the central nervous sys...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation 2014-06, Vol.11 (1), p.94-94 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 94 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 94 |
container_title | Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation |
container_volume | 11 |
creator | Kaneko, Fuminari Hayami, Tatsuya Aoyama, Toshiyuki Kizuka, Tomohiro |
description | The combination of voluntary effort and functional electrical stimulation (ES) appears to have a greater potential to induce plasticity in the motor cortex than either electrical stimulation or voluntary training alone. However, it is not clear whether the motor commands from the central nervous system, the afferent input from peripheral organs, or both, are indispensable to induce the facilitative effects on cortical excitability. To clarify whether voluntary motor commands enhance corticospinal tract (CoST) excitability during neuromuscular ES, without producing voluntary muscular contraction (VMC), we examined the effect of a combination of motor imagery (MI) and electrical muscular stimulation on CoST excitability using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS).
Eight neurologically healthy male subjects participated in this study. Five conditions (resting, MI, ES, ES + MI [ESMI], and VMC) were established. In the ES condition, a 50-Hz stimulus was applied for 3 to 5 s to the first dorsal interosseous (FDI) while subjects were relaxed. In the MI condition, subjects were instructed to imagine abducting their index finger. In the ESMI condition, ES was applied approximately 1 s after the subject had begun to imagine index finger abduction. In the VMC condition, subjects modulated the force of index finger abduction to match a target level, which was set at the level produced during the ES condition. TMS was applied on the hotspot for FDI, and the amplitude and latency of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) were measured under each condition.
MEP amplitudes during VMC and ESMI were significantly larger than those during other conditions; there was no significant difference in MEP amplitude between these 2 conditions. The latency of MEPs evoked during MI and VMC were significantly shorter than were those evoked during rest and ES.
MEP acutely reinforced in ESMI may indicate that voluntary motor drive markedly contributes to enhance CoST excitability, without actual muscular contraction. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1186/1743-0003-11-94 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4113028</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A539682255</galeid><sourcerecordid>A539682255</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c664t-71d9af5eb40731da70cb9f0070d94e27b334f7af1c28b5d0ddf08a643abeb8593</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNks1vFSEUxSdGY2t17c6QuHEzLQwwM2xMmsavpMaNrgkDlycNA09gXtqV_7qM7_nSGheGBXD5nRM43KZ5SfA5IWN_QQZGW4wxbQlpBXvUnB4rj--tT5pnOd_UBcOcPW1OOiZwNwpy2vz8HEtMyM1qA-kOqWAQeNAlOa08ysXNi1fFxYASbFM0iwakYypOx7x1oTJwq11Rk_OuVH1BHnbgM8pudl4lVCLaRb-Eoqr9vGTtV4NQktKr7fPmiVU-w4vDfNZ8e__u69XH9vrLh09Xl9et7ntW2oEYoSyHieGBEqMGrCdhMR6wEQy6YaKU2UFZortx4gYbY_GoekbVBNPIBT1r3u59t8s0g9Gw3sDLbaovT3cyKicfngT3XW7iTjJCaM2qGrw5GKT4Y4Fc5OyyBu9VgLhkSThngvWYD_-BMtFTLASt6Ou_0Ju4pBrrnuKs578ND9RGeZAu2LjGt5rKS05FP3Yd55U6_wdVh4G5flcA62r9geBiL9Ap5pzAHuMgWK7tJdcGkmsD1a0UrCpe3U_xyP_pJ_oLBDnM9Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1549546557</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Motor imagery and electrical stimulation reproduce corticospinal excitability at levels similar to voluntary muscle contraction</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Kaneko, Fuminari ; Hayami, Tatsuya ; Aoyama, Toshiyuki ; Kizuka, Tomohiro</creator><creatorcontrib>Kaneko, Fuminari ; Hayami, Tatsuya ; Aoyama, Toshiyuki ; Kizuka, Tomohiro</creatorcontrib><description>The combination of voluntary effort and functional electrical stimulation (ES) appears to have a greater potential to induce plasticity in the motor cortex than either electrical stimulation or voluntary training alone. However, it is not clear whether the motor commands from the central nervous system, the afferent input from peripheral organs, or both, are indispensable to induce the facilitative effects on cortical excitability. To clarify whether voluntary motor commands enhance corticospinal tract (CoST) excitability during neuromuscular ES, without producing voluntary muscular contraction (VMC), we examined the effect of a combination of motor imagery (MI) and electrical muscular stimulation on CoST excitability using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS).
Eight neurologically healthy male subjects participated in this study. Five conditions (resting, MI, ES, ES + MI [ESMI], and VMC) were established. In the ES condition, a 50-Hz stimulus was applied for 3 to 5 s to the first dorsal interosseous (FDI) while subjects were relaxed. In the MI condition, subjects were instructed to imagine abducting their index finger. In the ESMI condition, ES was applied approximately 1 s after the subject had begun to imagine index finger abduction. In the VMC condition, subjects modulated the force of index finger abduction to match a target level, which was set at the level produced during the ES condition. TMS was applied on the hotspot for FDI, and the amplitude and latency of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) were measured under each condition.
MEP amplitudes during VMC and ESMI were significantly larger than those during other conditions; there was no significant difference in MEP amplitude between these 2 conditions. The latency of MEPs evoked during MI and VMC were significantly shorter than were those evoked during rest and ES.
MEP acutely reinforced in ESMI may indicate that voluntary motor drive markedly contributes to enhance CoST excitability, without actual muscular contraction.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1743-0003</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1743-0003</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1186/1743-0003-11-94</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24902891</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: BioMed Central Ltd</publisher><subject>Adult ; Brain ; Electric Stimulation ; Electromyography ; Evoked Potentials, Motor - physiology ; Humans ; Imagination - physiology ; Male ; Motor ability ; Motor Activity - physiology ; Muscle Contraction - physiology ; Muscle, Skeletal - physiology ; Muscular system ; Pyramidal Tracts - physiology ; Rehabilitation - methods ; Studies ; Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2014-06, Vol.11 (1), p.94-94</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2014 BioMed Central Ltd.</rights><rights>2014 Kaneko et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2014 Kaneko et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014 Kaneko et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c664t-71d9af5eb40731da70cb9f0070d94e27b334f7af1c28b5d0ddf08a643abeb8593</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4113028/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4113028/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24902891$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kaneko, Fuminari</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hayami, Tatsuya</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aoyama, Toshiyuki</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kizuka, Tomohiro</creatorcontrib><title>Motor imagery and electrical stimulation reproduce corticospinal excitability at levels similar to voluntary muscle contraction</title><title>Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation</title><addtitle>J Neuroeng Rehabil</addtitle><description>The combination of voluntary effort and functional electrical stimulation (ES) appears to have a greater potential to induce plasticity in the motor cortex than either electrical stimulation or voluntary training alone. However, it is not clear whether the motor commands from the central nervous system, the afferent input from peripheral organs, or both, are indispensable to induce the facilitative effects on cortical excitability. To clarify whether voluntary motor commands enhance corticospinal tract (CoST) excitability during neuromuscular ES, without producing voluntary muscular contraction (VMC), we examined the effect of a combination of motor imagery (MI) and electrical muscular stimulation on CoST excitability using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS).
Eight neurologically healthy male subjects participated in this study. Five conditions (resting, MI, ES, ES + MI [ESMI], and VMC) were established. In the ES condition, a 50-Hz stimulus was applied for 3 to 5 s to the first dorsal interosseous (FDI) while subjects were relaxed. In the MI condition, subjects were instructed to imagine abducting their index finger. In the ESMI condition, ES was applied approximately 1 s after the subject had begun to imagine index finger abduction. In the VMC condition, subjects modulated the force of index finger abduction to match a target level, which was set at the level produced during the ES condition. TMS was applied on the hotspot for FDI, and the amplitude and latency of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) were measured under each condition.
MEP amplitudes during VMC and ESMI were significantly larger than those during other conditions; there was no significant difference in MEP amplitude between these 2 conditions. The latency of MEPs evoked during MI and VMC were significantly shorter than were those evoked during rest and ES.
MEP acutely reinforced in ESMI may indicate that voluntary motor drive markedly contributes to enhance CoST excitability, without actual muscular contraction.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Brain</subject><subject>Electric Stimulation</subject><subject>Electromyography</subject><subject>Evoked Potentials, Motor - physiology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Imagination - physiology</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Motor ability</subject><subject>Motor Activity - physiology</subject><subject>Muscle Contraction - physiology</subject><subject>Muscle, Skeletal - physiology</subject><subject>Muscular system</subject><subject>Pyramidal Tracts - physiology</subject><subject>Rehabilitation - methods</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>1743-0003</issn><issn>1743-0003</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNks1vFSEUxSdGY2t17c6QuHEzLQwwM2xMmsavpMaNrgkDlycNA09gXtqV_7qM7_nSGheGBXD5nRM43KZ5SfA5IWN_QQZGW4wxbQlpBXvUnB4rj--tT5pnOd_UBcOcPW1OOiZwNwpy2vz8HEtMyM1qA-kOqWAQeNAlOa08ysXNi1fFxYASbFM0iwakYypOx7x1oTJwq11Rk_OuVH1BHnbgM8pudl4lVCLaRb-Eoqr9vGTtV4NQktKr7fPmiVU-w4vDfNZ8e__u69XH9vrLh09Xl9et7ntW2oEYoSyHieGBEqMGrCdhMR6wEQy6YaKU2UFZortx4gYbY_GoekbVBNPIBT1r3u59t8s0g9Gw3sDLbaovT3cyKicfngT3XW7iTjJCaM2qGrw5GKT4Y4Fc5OyyBu9VgLhkSThngvWYD_-BMtFTLASt6Ou_0Ju4pBrrnuKs578ND9RGeZAu2LjGt5rKS05FP3Yd55U6_wdVh4G5flcA62r9geBiL9Ap5pzAHuMgWK7tJdcGkmsD1a0UrCpe3U_xyP_pJ_oLBDnM9Q</recordid><startdate>20140605</startdate><enddate>20140605</enddate><creator>Kaneko, Fuminari</creator><creator>Hayami, Tatsuya</creator><creator>Aoyama, Toshiyuki</creator><creator>Kizuka, Tomohiro</creator><general>BioMed Central Ltd</general><general>BioMed Central</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7TS</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88C</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140605</creationdate><title>Motor imagery and electrical stimulation reproduce corticospinal excitability at levels similar to voluntary muscle contraction</title><author>Kaneko, Fuminari ; Hayami, Tatsuya ; Aoyama, Toshiyuki ; Kizuka, Tomohiro</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c664t-71d9af5eb40731da70cb9f0070d94e27b334f7af1c28b5d0ddf08a643abeb8593</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Brain</topic><topic>Electric Stimulation</topic><topic>Electromyography</topic><topic>Evoked Potentials, Motor - physiology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Imagination - physiology</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Motor ability</topic><topic>Motor Activity - physiology</topic><topic>Muscle Contraction - physiology</topic><topic>Muscle, Skeletal - physiology</topic><topic>Muscular system</topic><topic>Pyramidal Tracts - physiology</topic><topic>Rehabilitation - methods</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kaneko, Fuminari</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hayami, Tatsuya</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aoyama, Toshiyuki</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kizuka, Tomohiro</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Mechanical & Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Physical Education Index</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kaneko, Fuminari</au><au>Hayami, Tatsuya</au><au>Aoyama, Toshiyuki</au><au>Kizuka, Tomohiro</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Motor imagery and electrical stimulation reproduce corticospinal excitability at levels similar to voluntary muscle contraction</atitle><jtitle>Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation</jtitle><addtitle>J Neuroeng Rehabil</addtitle><date>2014-06-05</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>11</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>94</spage><epage>94</epage><pages>94-94</pages><issn>1743-0003</issn><eissn>1743-0003</eissn><abstract>The combination of voluntary effort and functional electrical stimulation (ES) appears to have a greater potential to induce plasticity in the motor cortex than either electrical stimulation or voluntary training alone. However, it is not clear whether the motor commands from the central nervous system, the afferent input from peripheral organs, or both, are indispensable to induce the facilitative effects on cortical excitability. To clarify whether voluntary motor commands enhance corticospinal tract (CoST) excitability during neuromuscular ES, without producing voluntary muscular contraction (VMC), we examined the effect of a combination of motor imagery (MI) and electrical muscular stimulation on CoST excitability using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS).
Eight neurologically healthy male subjects participated in this study. Five conditions (resting, MI, ES, ES + MI [ESMI], and VMC) were established. In the ES condition, a 50-Hz stimulus was applied for 3 to 5 s to the first dorsal interosseous (FDI) while subjects were relaxed. In the MI condition, subjects were instructed to imagine abducting their index finger. In the ESMI condition, ES was applied approximately 1 s after the subject had begun to imagine index finger abduction. In the VMC condition, subjects modulated the force of index finger abduction to match a target level, which was set at the level produced during the ES condition. TMS was applied on the hotspot for FDI, and the amplitude and latency of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) were measured under each condition.
MEP amplitudes during VMC and ESMI were significantly larger than those during other conditions; there was no significant difference in MEP amplitude between these 2 conditions. The latency of MEPs evoked during MI and VMC were significantly shorter than were those evoked during rest and ES.
MEP acutely reinforced in ESMI may indicate that voluntary motor drive markedly contributes to enhance CoST excitability, without actual muscular contraction.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>BioMed Central Ltd</pub><pmid>24902891</pmid><doi>10.1186/1743-0003-11-94</doi><tpages>1</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1743-0003 |
ispartof | Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2014-06, Vol.11 (1), p.94-94 |
issn | 1743-0003 1743-0003 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4113028 |
source | MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; SpringerLink Journals; PubMed Central Open Access; Springer Nature OA Free Journals; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central |
subjects | Adult Brain Electric Stimulation Electromyography Evoked Potentials, Motor - physiology Humans Imagination - physiology Male Motor ability Motor Activity - physiology Muscle Contraction - physiology Muscle, Skeletal - physiology Muscular system Pyramidal Tracts - physiology Rehabilitation - methods Studies Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Young Adult |
title | Motor imagery and electrical stimulation reproduce corticospinal excitability at levels similar to voluntary muscle contraction |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T06%3A37%3A07IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Motor%20imagery%20and%20electrical%20stimulation%20reproduce%20corticospinal%20excitability%20at%20levels%20similar%20to%20voluntary%20muscle%20contraction&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20neuroengineering%20and%20rehabilitation&rft.au=Kaneko,%20Fuminari&rft.date=2014-06-05&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=94&rft.epage=94&rft.pages=94-94&rft.issn=1743-0003&rft.eissn=1743-0003&rft_id=info:doi/10.1186/1743-0003-11-94&rft_dat=%3Cgale_pubme%3EA539682255%3C/gale_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1549546557&rft_id=info:pmid/24902891&rft_galeid=A539682255&rfr_iscdi=true |