Assessing proprioception: What do you really want to know?-Response to Krewer et al.

Jia Han, Gordon Waddington, Roger Adams, Judith Anson, Yu Liu

    Research output: Contribution to journalLetterpeer-review

    9 Citations (Scopus)
    44 Downloads (Pure)


    Dear editor,In their comment, Krewer et al.1argue that before selectinga specific method for assessing proprioception, it is essential toconsider which component of proprioception is to be assessed.They also note that there is no single method for assessing allaspects of the various proprioceptive senses, because the neu-rophysiological processes underlying proprioceptive functionare complex. We agree with this point of view, and would liketo extend this notion to include the argument that there is alsono single method for assessing an isolated aspect of proprio-ceptive sense, because any movement is associated with bothposition and movement information.2,3Therefore, althoughsome proprioceptive testing techniques seem to be specificallydesigned to assess solely movement sense or position sense, it isstill unclear to what extent movement information contributesto position sense testing andvice versa.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)93-94
    Number of pages2
    JournalJournal of Sport and Health Science
    Issue number1
    Publication statusPublished - 1 Mar 2016


    Dive into the research topics of 'Assessing proprioception: What do you really want to know?-Response to Krewer et al.'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this