Jacqueline A Palmer1, Alan R Needle2, Ryan T Pohlig3, Stuart A Binder-Macleod4. 1. Department of Physical Therapy, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19713, USA; Graduate Program in Biomechanics and Movement Science, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19713, USA. Electronic address: palmerja@udel.edu. 2. Department of Health and Exercise Science, Appalachian State University, Boone, NC 28608, USA. 3. Biostatistics Core Facility, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19713, USA. 4. Department of Physical Therapy, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19713, USA; Graduate Program in Biomechanics and Movement Science, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19713, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The role of cortical drive in stroke recovery for the lower extremity remains ambiguous. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between cortical drive and gait speed in a group of stroke survivors. METHODS: Eighteen individuals with stroke were dichotomized into fast or slow walking groups. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was used to collect motor evoked potentials (MEPs) from the tibialis anterior of each lower extremity during rest, paretic muscle contractions, and nonparetic muscle contractions. An asymmetry-index (AI) was calculated using motor thresholds and compared between groups. The average MEP of the paretic leg during TMS at maximal intensity (MEP100) for each condition was compared within and between groups. RESULTS: A significant positive correlation was found between AI and walking speed. Slow-walkers had greater MEP100s during the nonparetic contraction than during the paretic contraction or rest conditions. In contrast, fast-walkers had greatest MEP100s during the paretic contraction. CONCLUSIONS: Alterations in the balance of corticomotor excitability occur in the lower extremity of individuals with poor motor recovery post-stroke. This atypical cortical drive is dependent on activation of the unaffected hemisphere and contraction of the nonparetic leg. SIGNIFICANCE: Understanding mechanisms underlying motor function can help to identify specific patient deficits that impair function.
OBJECTIVE: The role of cortical drive in stroke recovery for the lower extremity remains ambiguous. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between cortical drive and gait speed in a group of stroke survivors. METHODS: Eighteen individuals with stroke were dichotomized into fast or slow walking groups. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was used to collect motor evoked potentials (MEPs) from the tibialis anterior of each lower extremity during rest, paretic muscle contractions, and nonparetic muscle contractions. An asymmetry-index (AI) was calculated using motor thresholds and compared between groups. The average MEP of the paretic leg during TMS at maximal intensity (MEP100) for each condition was compared within and between groups. RESULTS: A significant positive correlation was found between AI and walking speed. Slow-walkers had greater MEP100s during the nonparetic contraction than during the paretic contraction or rest conditions. In contrast, fast-walkers had greatest MEP100s during the paretic contraction. CONCLUSIONS: Alterations in the balance of corticomotor excitability occur in the lower extremity of individuals with poor motor recovery post-stroke. This atypical cortical drive is dependent on activation of the unaffected hemisphere and contraction of the nonparetic leg. SIGNIFICANCE: Understanding mechanisms underlying motor function can help to identify specific patient deficits that impair function.
Authors: Jacqueline A Palmer; Ryan Zarzycki; Susanne M Morton; Trisha M Kesar; Stuart A Binder-Macleod Journal: J Neurophysiol Date: 2017-01-11 Impact factor: 2.714
Authors: Charalambos C Charalambous; Jing Nong Liang; Steve A Kautz; Mark S George; Mark G Bowden Journal: J Vis Exp Date: 2019-02-19 Impact factor: 1.355
Authors: Jacqueline A Palmer; Trisha M Kesar; Steven L Wolf; Michael R Borich Journal: Neurorehabil Neural Repair Date: 2021-09-27 Impact factor: 3.919
Authors: Gilles Allali; Helena M Blumen; Hervé Devanne; Elvira Pirondini; Arnaud Delval; Dimitri Van De Ville Journal: Neurophysiol Clin Date: 2018-10-25 Impact factor: 3.734