This article provides a neurobiological account of symptoms that have been called ‘hysterical’, ‘psychogenic’ or ‘medically unexplained’, which we will call functional motor and sensory symptoms. We use a neurobiologically informed model of hierarchical Bayesian inference in the brain to explain functional motor and sensory symptoms in terms of perception and action arising from inference based on prior beliefs and sensory information. This explanation exploits the key balance between prior beliefs and sensory evidence that is mediated by (body focused) attention, symptom expectations, physical and emotional experiences and beliefs about illness. Crucially, this furnishes an explanation at three different levels: (i) underlying neuromodulatory (synaptic) mechanisms; (ii) cognitive and experiential processes (attention and attribution of agency); and (iii) formal computations that underlie perceptual inference (representation of uncertainty or precision). Our explanation involves primary and secondary failures of inference; the primary failure is the (autonomous) emergence of a percept or belief that is held with undue certainty (precision) following top-down attentional modulation of synaptic gain. This belief can constitute a sensory percept (or its absence) or induce movement (or its absence). The secondary failure of inference is when the ensuing percept (and any somatosensory consequences) is falsely inferred to be a symptom to explain why its content was not predicted by the source of attentional modulation. This account accommodates several fundamental observations about functional motor and sensory symptoms, including: (i) their induction and maintenance by attention; (ii) their modification by expectation, prior experience and cultural beliefs and (iii) their involuntary and symptomatic nature.

Importance Functional neurological disorders (FND) are common sources of disability in medicine. Patients have often been misdiagnosed, correctly diagnosed after lengthy delays, and/or subjected to poorly delivered diagnoses that prevent diagnostic understanding and lead to inappropriate treatments, iatrogenic harm, unnecessary and costly evaluations, and poor outcomes. Observations Functional Neurological Symptom Disorder/Conversion Disorder was adopted bythe Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, replacing the termpsychogenicwithfunctionaland removing the criterion of psychological stress as a prerequisite for FND. A diagnosis can now be made in an inclusionary manner by identifying neurological signs that are specific to FNDs without reliance on presence or absence of psychological stressors or suggestive historical clues. The new model highlights a wider range of past sensitizing events, such as physical trauma, medical illness, or physiological/psychophysiological events. In this model, strong ideas and expectations about these events correlate with abnormal predictions of sensory data and body-focused attention. Neurobiological abnormalities include hypoactivation of the supplementary motor area and relative disconnection with areas that select or inhibit movements and are associated with a sense of agency. Promising evidence has accumulated for the benefit of specific physical rehabilitation and psychological interventions alone or in combination, but clinical trial evidence remains limited. Conclusions and Relevance Functional neurological disorders are a neglected but potentially reversible source of disability. Further research is needed to determine the dose and duration of various interventions, the value of combination treatments and multidisciplinary therapy, and the therapeutic modality best suited for each patient.

The brain‐derived neurotrophic factor gene (BDNF) is one of many genes thought to influence synaptic plasticity in the adult brain and shows a common single nucleotide polymorphism (BDNF Val66Met) in the normal population that is associated with differences in hippocampal volume and episodic memory. It is also thought to influence possible synaptic changes in motor cortex following a simple motor learning task. Here we extend these studies by using new non‐invasive transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (TDCS) techniques that directly test the excitability and plasticity of neuronal circuits in human motor cortex in subjects at rest. We investigated whether the susceptibility to TMS probes of plasticity is significantly influenced by the BDNF polymorphism. Val66Met carriers were matched with Val66Val individuals and tested on the following protocols: continuous and intermittent theta burst TMS; median nerve paired associative stimulation; and homeostatic plasticity in the TDCS/1 Hz rTMS model. The response of Met allele carriers differed significantly in all protocols compared with the response of Val66Val individuals. We suggest that this is due to the effect of BNDF on the susceptibility of synapses to undergo LTP/LTD. The circuits tested here are implicated in the pathophysiology of movement disorders such as dystonia and are being assessed as potential new targets in the treatment of stroke. Thus the polymorphism may be one factor that influences the natural response of the brain to injury and disease.

Active inference provides a simple and neurobiologically plausible account of how action and perception are coupled in producing (Bayes) optimal behaviour. This can be seen most easily as minimising prediction error: we can either change our predictions to explain sensory input through perception. Alternatively, we can actively change sensory input to fulfil our predictions. In active inference, this action is mediated by classical reflex arcs that minimise proprioceptive prediction error created by descending proprioceptive predictions. However, this creates a conflict between action and perception; in that, self-generated movements require predictions to override the sensory evidence that one is not actually moving. However, ignoring sensory evidence means that externally generated sensations will not be perceived. Conversely, attending to (proprioceptive and somatosensory) sensations enables the detection of externally generated events but precludes generation of actions. This conflict can be resolved by attenuating the precision of sensory evidence during movement or, equivalently, attending away from the consequences of self-made acts. We propose that this Bayes optimal withdrawal of precise sensory evidence during movement is the cause of psychophysical sensory attenuation. Furthermore, it explains the force-matching illusion and reproduces empirical results almost exactly. Finally, if attenuation is removed, the force-matching illusion disappears and false (delusional) inferences about agency emerge. This is important, given the negative correlation between sensory attenuation and delusional beliefs in normal subjects—and the reduction in the magnitude of the illusion in schizophrenia. Active inference therefore links the neuromodulatory optimisation of precision to sensory attenuation and illusory phenomena during the attribution of agency in normal subjects. It also provides a functional account of deficits in syndromes characterised by false inference and impaired movement—like schizophrenia and Parkinsonism—syndromes that implicate abnormal modulatory neurotransmission.

Background Patients with functional motor disorder (FMD) including weakness and paralysis are commonly referred to physiotherapists. There is growing evidence that physiotherapy is an effective treatment, but the existing literature has limited explanations of what physiotherapy should consist of and there are insufficient data to produce evidence-based guidelines. We aim to address this issue by presenting recommendations for physiotherapy treatment. Methods A meeting was held between physiotherapists, neurologists and neuropsychiatrists, all with extensive experience in treating FMD. A set of consensus recommendations were produced based on existing evidence and experience. Results We recommend that physiotherapy treatment is based on a biopsychosocial aetiological framework. Treatment should address illness beliefs, self-directed attention and abnormal habitual movement patterns through a process of education, movement retraining and self-management strategies within a positive and non-judgemental context. We provide specific examples of these strategies for different symptoms. Conclusions Physiotherapy has a key role in the multidisciplinary management of patients with FMD. There appear to be specific physiotherapy techniques which are useful in FMD and which are amenable to and require prospective evaluation. The processes involved in referral, treatment and discharge from physiotherapy should be considered carefully as a part of a treatment package.