Discussions (D)
Terence R. Anthoney in Neuroanatomy and the Neurologic Exam, 2017
Because the terms “somatosensory” and “somatic sensations” are so similar, they are occasionally interchanged semantically. For example, Alf Brodal, whose primary research has been anatomical in focus, sometimes uses the term “somatosensory” so broadly in his textbook as to include some of the special senses. Under the heading of “The somatosensory cortical areas”, for example, he states that “Among such sensory cortical areas one would list, for example, the striate area, since this appeared to be the only cortical area receiving impulses from the eye via the lateral geniculate body” (1981, p. 107). The textbook by Kandel and Schwartz (1985), on the other hand, has a neurophysiological emphasis; and these authors use the term “somatic sensations,” as in the chapter entitled “Anatomical Substrates for Somatic Sensation” (p. 301–315), to refer only to “tactile sensation,” “proprioception,” and “pain and temperature” (p. 307).
Quantitative Clinical, Sensory, and Autonomic Testing of Chronic Neuropathic Pain
Gary W. Jay in Practical Guide to Chronic Pain Syndromes, 2016
Recording of the spatial characteristics of the pain, whether chronic or acute (12), should be done early in the pain history. The regions of symptom onset, patterns of radiation or referral to other body sites, and any association with loss or excess of somatic sensation within the symptomatic regions have major relevance in the diagnosis of neuropathic pain. In patients who suffer from multiple pain types or regions, or in whom there coexists abnormal perception of different modes of sensory stimulation, documenting clinical data using only verbal descriptors can be overwhelming. Therefore, it is common practice for physicians to have patients draw or shade their pain symptoms on preprinted outlines of the human body, known either as the pain drawing instrument or more simply as the pain drawing. There are many versions or styles of the pain drawing, the most common of which consists of either (a) an anterior and posterior view of the body similar to that found in the McGill Pain Questionnaire (13), or (b) these two views plus two combined lateral and medial views, known as the “walking man” (14). Regardless of which form of pain drawing is selected, it is essential to use a type that does not include lines indicating sensory dermatomes of the type originally reported by Foerster (15, 16). Avoidance of this latter type is important since patients who are naïve to the pain drawing method often seem compelled to indicate their pains by shading only between the lines, the results of which may not reflect the true distribution of their personal symptoms.
Applied physiology of nociception
Pamela E Macintyre, Suellen M Walker, David J Rowbotham in Clinical Pain Management, 2008
The somatosensory system processes four broadly distinct sensory modalities: tactile, proprioceptive, thermal sensations, and pain.1 According to the specificity theory, each sensory modality is mediated by a separate class of receptor and a distinct neuroanatomical pathway. However, while this classification is by no means as rigid as first thought, it does hold under most physiological conditions. Sherrington2 proposed that cutaneous receptors responding selectively to tissue-damaging (noxious) stimuli should be designated nociceptors. When noxious thermal or mechanical stimuli are applied to the skin, a chain of events is set in motion that usually results in perception of the sensation of pain.
The Ideology of Transference: Laplanche and Affect Theory
Published in Studies in Gender and Sexuality, 2018
This critical engagement with Laplanche reveals the extent to which any rigorous analysis of complex psychological process, such as sexuality, for example, requires a supple framework for tracking the internal effects of a subject’s complex encounter with a dynamic, enigmatic world. As we already observed with some of the questions that Saketopoulou’s (2014) essay prompted: what is the relationship between a felt experience and a somatic sensation? Is affective experience contingent on the subject having a representational apparatus? How does a subject register, somatically or symbolically, an encounter with the “enigmatic signifiers” of his own unconscious? Although there is “no single, generalizable theory of affect” (Gregg and Seigworth, 2010, p. 3), Affect Theory has done tremendous and provocative work in elaborating manifold possibilities for how we might think about affect that, in the context of a critique of existing metapsychology, provides indispensable tools for conceptualizing subjectivity outside conventional frames.
The forgotten sixth sense in cerebral palsy: do we have enough evidence for proprioceptive treatment?
Published in Disability and Rehabilitation, 2020
Bilge Nur Yardımcı-Lokmanoğlu, Hasan Bingöl, Akmer Mutlu
Besides all these, somatosensory system and especially proprioception sense play a critical role in the sensory control of balance [14]. Children with CP commonly have reduced balance and are inclined to rely disproportionately upon visual input to protect their posture and position their limbs during gait, which may indicate proprioceptive impairment [15]. Balance with normal postural control requires integration of visual, somatosensory (proprioceptive, cutaneous, and joint) and vestibular inputs and adaptation of these inputs accordingly with environmental conditions and task changes [14,16–19]. Moreover, the contribution of visual information to kinesthesia and its interaction with muscle proprioception is more fully documented than tactile knowledge. This is thought to be based on the fact that it is difficult to differentiate these somatosensory inputs experimentally [20]. It has been shown that instability in people with neurological problems may result from inappropriate interaction between the three sensory inputs that provide this information [21,22].
Hypnotic Automaticity in the Brain at Rest: An Arterial Spin Labelling Study
Published in International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 2019
Pierre Rainville, Anouk Streff, Jen-I Chen, Bérengère Houzé, Carolane Desmarteaux, Mathieu Piché
The first brain imaging study examining more directly the brain correlates of hypnotic involuntariness showed robust parietal activity while subjects moved their arm in response to hypnotic suggestions that their arm would be moved passively (Blakemore, Oakley, & Frith, 2003). Importantly, the study included control passive and active movements in a nonhypnotic condition to allow comparing brain responses associated with normal sensory feedback alone (passive condition) and executive motor processes (active condition). In the normal passive condition, the afferent sensory signal conveyed through the somatosensory system activated the parietal cortex in the region of the inferior parietal lobule (parietal operculum/supramarginal gyrus). In the active condition, motor cortices were also activated to produce the motor command. In this condition, there was less parietal activity, consistent with the feedforward model of motor control (Wolpert & Ghahramani, 2000). Indeed, during voluntary actions, a motor command is sent to the motoneurons while a copy of this efferent signal is sent to sensory areas of the parietal cortex to monitor the correspondence between the sensory feedback and the expected effect of the action that was prescribed (i.e., prediction signal). Importantly, when the feedback matches the expectations, activity is reduced in the parietal cortex. However, when there is a mismatch (i.e., prediction error) or during passive movement (i.e., no prediction signal), the parietal cortex is strongly activated.
Related Knowledge Centers
- Auditory System
- Haptic Perception
- Nervous System
- Physiology
- Proprioception
- Thermoception
- Visual System
- Pain
- Sensory Nervous System
- Sense of Smell