English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Stimulation of high threshold mechanical nociceptors on the skin can modulate efferent sympathetic outflow. Whether low threshold mechanoreceptors from glabrous skin are similarly capable of modulating autonomic outflow is unclear. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the effects of cutaneous afferent feedback from the hand palm and foot sole on efferent muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA). Fifteen healthy young participants (9 male; 25 ± 3 years [range: 22–29]) underwent microneurographic recording of multi-unit MSNA from the right fibular nerve during 2 min of baseline and 2 min of mechanical vibration (150 Hz, 220 μm peak-to-peak) applied to the left hand or foot. Each participant completed three trials of both hand and foot stimulation, each separated by 5 min. MSNA burst frequency decreased similarly during the 2 min of both hand (20.8 ± 8.9 vs. 19.3 ± 8.6 bursts/minute [Δ −8%],  p  = 0.035) and foot (21.0 ± 8.3 vs. 19.5 ± 8.3 bursts/minute [Δ −8%],  p  = 0.048) vibration but did not alter normalized mean burst amplitude or area (All  p  > 0.05). Larger reductions in burst frequency were observed during the first 10 s (onset) of both hand (20.8 ± 8.9 vs. 17.0 ± 10.4 [Δ −25%],  p  < 0.001) and foot (21.0 ± 8.3 vs. 18.3 ± 9.4 [Δ −16%],  p  = 0.035) vibration, in parallel with decreases in normalized mean burst amplitude (hand: 0.45 ± 0.06 vs. 0.36 ± 0.14% [Δ −19%],  p  = 0.03; foot: 0.47 ± 0.07 vs. 0.34 ± 0.19% [Δ −27%],  p  = 0.02) and normalized mean burst area (hand: 0.42 ± 0.05 vs. 0.32 ± 0.12% [Δ −25%],  p  = 0.003; foot: 0.47 ± 0.05 vs. 0.34 ± 0.16% [Δ −28%],  p  = 0.01). These results demonstrate that tactile feedback from the hands and feet can influence efferent sympathetic outflow to skeletal muscle.

Cutaneous Mechanoreceptor Feedback from the Hand and Foot Can Modulate Muscle Sympathetic Nerve Activity