Patrick Forbes

Dr. Patrick Forbes

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

22Years (2005-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 January 2018
Verified
Book Chapter
Closed access
PFPatrick Forbes
Patrick Forbes
ACAnthony Chen
Anthony Chen
JBJean-Sébastien Blouin
Jean-Sébastien Blouin

23 April 2019 in Nature Communications
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
AKAnnie Kwan
Annie Kwan
PFPatrick Forbes
Patrick Forbes
DMDiana E. Mitchell
Diana E. Mitchell
JBJean-Sébastien Blouin
Jean-Sébastien Blouin
KCKathleen E Cullen
Kathleen E Cullen
Galvanic vestibular stimulation (GVS) uses the external application of electrical current to selectively target the vestibular system in humans. Despite its recent popularity for the assessment/treatment of clinical conditions, exactly how this non-invasive tool activates the vestibular system remains an open question. Here we directly investigate single vestibular afferent responses to GVS applied to the mastoid processes of awake-behaving monkeys. Transmastoid GVS produces robust and parallel activation of both canal and otolith afferents. Notably, afferent activation increases with intrinsic neuronal variability resulting in constant GVS-evoked neuronal detection thresholds across all afferents. Additionally, afferent tuning differs for GVS versus natural self-motion stimulation. Using a stochastic model of repetitive activity in afferents, we largely explain the main features of GVS-evoked vestibular afferent dynamics. Taken together, our results reveal the neural substrate underlying transmastoid GVS-evoked perceptual, ocular and postural responses—information that is essential to advance GVS applicability for biomedical uses in humans.

26 October 2018 in Frontiers in Neurology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
BRBrandon G. Rasman
Brandon G. Rasman
PFPatrick Forbes
Patrick Forbes
RTROMAIN TISSERAND
ROMAIN TISSERAND
JBJean-Sébastien Blouin
Jean-Sébastien Blouin
Standing balance relies on the integration of multiple sensory inputs to generate the motor commands required to stand. Mechanical and sensory perturbations elicit compensatory postural responses that are interpreted as a window into the sensorimotor processing involved in balance control. Popular methods involve imposed external perturbations that disrupt the control of quiet stance. Although these approaches provide critical information on how the balance system responds to external disturbances, the control mechanisms involved in correcting for these errors may differ from those responsible for the regulation of quiet standing. Alternative approaches use manipulations of the balance control loop to alter the relationship between sensory and motor cues. Coupled with imposed perturbations, these manipulations of the balance control loop provide unique opportunities to reveal how sensory and motor signals are integrated to control the upright body. In this review, we first explore imposed perturbation approaches that have been used to investigate the neural control of standing balance. We emphasize imposed perturbations that only elicit balance responses when the disturbing stimuli are relevant to the balance task. Next, we highlight manipulations of the balance control loop that, when carefully implemented, replicate and/or alter the sensorimotor dynamics of quiet standing. We further describe how manipulations of the balance control loop can be used in combination with imposed perturbations to characterize mechanistic principles underlying the control of standing balance. We propose that recent developments in the use of robotics and sensory manipulations will continue to enable new possibilities for simulating and/or altering the sensorimotor control of standing beyond compensatory responses to imposed external perturbations.

9 January 2015 in Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PFPatrick Forbes
Patrick Forbes
GSGunter P. Siegmund
Gunter P. Siegmund
ASAlfred C. Schouten
Alfred C. Schouten
JBJean-Sã©Bastien Blouin
Jean-Sã©Bastien Blouin
The vestibular system is crucial for postural control; however there are considerable differences in the task dependence and frequency response of vestibular reflexes in appendicular and axial muscles. For example, vestibular reflexes are only evoked in appendicular muscles when vestibular information is relevant to postural control, while in neck muscles they are maintained regardless of the requirement to maintain head on trunk balance. Recent investigations have also shown that the bandwidth of vestibular input on neck muscles is much broader than appendicular muscles (up to a factor of 3). This result challenges the notion that vestibular reflexes only contribute to postural control across the behavioral and physiological frequency range of the vestibular organ (i.e., 0–20 Hz). In this review, we explore and integrate these task-, muscle- and frequency-related differences in the vestibular system’s contribution to posture, and propose that the human nervous system has adapted vestibular signals to match the mechanical properties of the system that each group of muscles controls.

9 November 2016 in Journal of Neuroscience
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PFPatrick Forbes
Patrick Forbes
BLBilly L. Luu
Billy L. Luu
HLH.F. Machiel Van der Loos
H.F. Machiel Van der Loos
ECElizabeth A. Croft
Elizabeth A. Croft
JIJ. Timothy Inglis
J. Timothy Inglis
JBJean-Sébastien Blouin
Jean-Sébastien Blouin
During standing balance, vestibular signals encode head movement and are transformed into coordinates that are relevant to maintaining upright posture of the whole body. This transformation must account for head-on-body orientation as well as the muscle actions generating the postural response. Here, we investigate whether this transformation is dependent upon a muscle's ability to stabilize the body along the direction of a vestibular disturbance. Subjects were braced on top of a robotic balance system that simulated the mechanics of standing while being exposed to an electrical vestibular stimulus that evoked a craniocentric vestibular error of head roll. The balance system was limited to move in a single plane while the vestibular error direction was manipulated by having subjects rotate their head in yaw. Vestibular-evoked muscle responses were greatest when the vestibular error was aligned with the balance direction and decreased to zero as the two directions became orthogonal. This demonstrates that muscles respond only to the component of the error that is aligned with the balance direction and thus relevant to the balance task, not to the cumulative afferent activity, as expected for vestibulospinal reflex loops. When we reversed the relationship between balancing motor commands and associated vestibular sensory feedback, the direction of vestibular-evoked ankle compensatory responses was also reversed. This implies that the nervous system quickly reassociates new relationships between vestibular sensory signals and motor commands related to maintaining balance. These results indicate that vestibular-evoked muscle activity is a highly flexible balance response organized to compensate for vestibular disturbances.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENTThe postural corrections critical to standing balance and navigation rely on transformation of sensory information into reference frames that are relevant for the required motor actions. Here, we demonstrate that the nervous system transforms vestibular sensory signals of head motion according to a muscle's ability to stabilize the body along the direction of a vestibular-evoked disturbance. By manipulating the direction of the imposed vestibular signal relative to a muscle's action, we show that the vestibular contribution to muscle activity is a highly flexible and organized balance response. This study provides insight into the neural integration and central processing associated with transformed vestibulomotor relationships that are essential to standing upright.

1 May 2011 in Clinical Biomechanics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JBJordi Borst
Jordi Borst
PFPatrick Forbes
Patrick Forbes
RHRiender Happee
Riender Happee
H.E.J. (DirkJan) VeegerH.E.J. (DirkJan) Veeger
H.E.J. (DirkJan) Veeger