Multiple descending motor pathways likely contribute to the recovery of hand motor function following spinal cord injury (SCI). Reticulospinal neurons project to spinal motor neurons controlling hand muscles and extensively sprout into gray matter structures after SCI; therefore, it has been proposed that the reticulospinal tract is one of the descending motor pathways involved in recovery of hand function after injury. To test this hypothesis, we examined the StartReact response, an involuntary release of a planned movement via a startling stimulus that engages the reticulospinal tract, by measuring reaction times from electromyographic activity in an intrinsic finger muscle during three motor tasks requiring different degrees of hand dexterity: index finger abduction, a precision grip, and a power grip. Males and females with and without incomplete chronic cervical SCI were tested. We found that although SCI participants voluntarily responded to all tasks, reaction times were shorter during a startle cue while performing a power grip but not index finger abduction or precision grip. Control subjects had similarly shorter reaction times during a startle cue in all motor tasks. These results provide the first evidence for a contribution of the reticulospinal tract to hand control in humans with SCI during gross finger manipulations and suggest that this contribution is less pronounced during fine dexterous finger movements.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENTIt has been long proposed that brainstem pathways contribute to the recovery of hand function in humans with spinal cord injury (SCI). Here, we show that individuals with anatomically incomplete chronic cervical SCI responded to a startle stimulus, a test that engages the reticulospinal tract, while performing a power grip but not during index finger abduction or precision grip. Control subjects responded to a startle stimulus similarly across tasks. These observations show that reticulospinal outputs after SCI contribute to hand motor tasks involving gross finger movements. Interestingly, this contribution is less pronounced during fine dexterous finger movements.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 July 2020.
All research outputs
#12,440,152
of 34,559,526 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neuroscience
#13,321
of 23,430 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#142,872
of 355,365 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neuroscience
#166
of 271 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,559,526 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 23,430 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 355,365 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 271 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
