This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Wolfgang Schady, MD, MRCP, DMedSci
Department of Clinical Neurophysiology University Hospital S-751 85 Uppsala, Sweden

Arch Neurol. 1984;41(8):815.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.

—In a recent contribution to the ARCHIVES,¹ Paillard et al described a patient with severe right hemianesthesia and purportedly preserved cutaneous localization. I take issue with their interpretation of some of the findings in this case, in particular with their principal conclusion that there was dissociation between localization and identification of cutaneous stimuli. The accuracy of such a statement depends on their understanding of the word identification. If by it they mean "awareness" or "perception," as I think they do, I submit that their conclusion is incorrect. The subject was clearly aware of an event when she was touched, especially after training: during localization trials, only six of 54 touch stimuli on her right hand elicited no response, and none of the false stimuli elicited a response. This is in contrast with the authors' claim that the patient was "unable to detect static pressure," and rather suggests inadequacy . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?