Kinematics and muscle activity of individuals with incomplete spinal cord injury during treadmill stepping with and without manual assistance.
BACKGROUND
Treadmill training with bodyweight support and manual assistance improves walking ability of patients with neurological injury. The purpose of this study was to determine how manual assistance changes muscle activation and kinematic patterns during treadmill training in individuals with incomplete spinal cord injury.


METHODS
We tested six volunteers with incomplete spinal cord injury and six volunteers with intact nervous systems. Subjects with spinal cord injury walked on a treadmill at six speeds (0.18-1.07 m/s) with body weight support with and without manual assistance. Healthy subjects walked at the same speeds only with body weight support. We measured electromyographic (EMG) and kinematics in the lower extremities and calculated EMG root mean square (RMS) amplitudes and joint excursions. We performed cross-correlation analyses to compare EMG and kinematic profiles.


RESULTS
Normalized muscle activation amplitudes and profiles in subjects with spinal cord injury were similar for stepping with and without manual assistance (ANOVA, p > 0.05). Muscle activation amplitudes increased with increasing speed (ANOVA, p < 0.05). When comparing spinal cord injury subject EMG data to control subject EMG data, neither the condition with manual assistance nor the condition without manual assistance showed a greater similarity to the control subject data, except for vastus lateralis. The shape and timing of EMG patterns in subjects with spinal cord injury became less similar to controls at faster speeds, especially when walking without manual assistance (ANOVA, p < 0.05). There were no consistent changes in kinematic profiles across spinal cord injury subjects when they were given manual assistance. Knee joint excursion was approximately 5 degrees greater with manual assistance during swing (ANOVA, p < 0.05). Hip and ankle joint excursions were both approximately 3 degrees lower with manual assistance during stance (ANOVA, p < 0.05).


CONCLUSIONS
Providing manual assistance does not lower EMG amplitudes or alter muscle activation profiles in relatively higher functioning spinal cord injury subjects. One advantage of manual assistance is that it allows spinal cord injury subjects to walk at faster speeds than they could without assistance. Concerns that manual assistance will promote passivity in subjects are unsupported by our findings.
Domingo
Antoinette
A
Division of Kinesiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. adomingo@umich.edu
Sawicki
Gregory S
GS
Ferris
Daniel P
DP
D000328:Adult; D000704:Analysis of Variance; D001696:Biomechanical Phenomena / Q000502:physiology; D004576:Electromyography; D005071:Evoked Potentials / Q000502:physiology; D005080:Exercise Test / Q000379:methods; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D018482:Muscle, Skeletal / Q000503:physiopathology*; D009989:Orthotic Devices; D013119:Spinal Cord Injuries / Q000473:pathology / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000534:rehabilitation; D013997:Time Factors; D016138:Walking / Q000502:physiology*; D055815:Young Adult
Eur J Neurosci. 1995 Apr 1;7(4):823-9
7620630
Motor Control. 2005 Apr;9(2):144-63
15995256
J Rehabil Res Dev. 2005 Jan-Feb;42(1):xi-xiv
15742244
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005 Dec;86(12):2385-6; author reply 2386-7
16344039
Brain. 2004 May;127(Pt 5):1019-34
14988161
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2003 Sep;17(3):153-67
14503436
J Biomech. 2006;39(14):2714-8
16219314
Spinal Cord. 2001 May;39(5):252-5
11438840
Paraplegia. 1992 Apr;30(4):229-38
1625890
Brain. 2003 Apr;126(Pt 4):866-72
12615644
J Appl Physiol (1985). 2004 Oct;97(4):1299-308
15180979
Spinal Cord. 1998 Jun;36(6):380-90
9648193
Spinal Cord. 2004 Jan;42(1):14-23
14713939
Annu Rev Physiol. 2000;62:723-53
10845109
IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2005 Mar;13(1):33-9
15813404
Brain Res Brain Res Rev. 2002 Oct;40(1-3):274-91
12589926
Spinal Cord. 1998 Nov;36(11):744-9
9848480
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002 May;83(5):683-91
11994808
Neurophysiol Clin. 2005 Jul;35(2-3):59-71
16087069
J Neurophysiol. 2005 Feb;93(2):777-85
15385590
J Neurol Rehabil. 1995;9(4):183-90
11539274
Scand J Rehabil Med. 1998 Mar;30(1):39-46
9526753
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001 Jun;82(6):818-24
11387589
Scand J Rehabil Med. 1986;18(3):133-5
3787209
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1985 Oct;67(8):1245-50
4055849
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2000 Sep;81(9):1158-61
10987154
Phys Ther. 2002 Jul;82(7):707-15
12088467
Spinal Cord. 2005 May;43(5):291-8
15685260
Brain. 2004 Oct;127(Pt 10):2232-46
15289272
Res Q. 1976 Dec;47(4):788-96
1070752
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2006 Feb 28;3:3
16504172
Stroke. 2002 Feb;33(2):553-8
11823669
Spinal Cord. 2003 May;41(5):257-70
12714988
Neurology. 2006 Feb 28;66(4):484-93
16505299
J Neurophysiol. 1997 Feb;77(2):797-811
9065851
J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 1994;4(1):15-26
20870543
Phys Ther. 2000 Jul;80(7):688-700
10869131
J Neurotrauma. 2002 Oct;19(10):1217-29
12427330
J Neurophysiol. 2005 Feb;93(2):1099-103
15456807
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005 Apr;86(4):672-80
15827916
Ann Neurol. 1995 May;37(5):574-82
7755351