| Literature DB >> 28399877 |
Amanda E Chisholm1,2, Raed A Alamro3,4, Alison M M Williams3,4, Tania Lam3,4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Robotic overground gait training devices, such as the Ekso, require users to actively participate in triggering steps through weight-shifting movements. It remains unknown how much the trunk muscles are activated during these movements, and if it is possible to transfer training effects to seated balance control. This study was conducted to compare the activity of postural control muscles of the trunk during overground (Ekso) vs. treadmill-based (Lokomat) robotic gait training, and evaluate changes in seated balance control in people with high-thoracic motor-complete spinal cord injury (SCI).Entities:
Keywords: Balance; Gait; Motor activity; Robotics; Spinal cord injury
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28399877 PMCID: PMC5387335 DOI: 10.1186/s12984-017-0236-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Neuroeng Rehabil ISSN: 1743-0003 Impact factor: 4.262
Participant demographic and clinical data
| P1 | P2 | P3 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (y) | 41 | 42 | 39 |
| Weight (kg) | 92.3 | 68.0 | 68.8 |
| Height (cm) | 183 | 170 | 178 |
| Gender | M | M | F |
| Injury Level | T3 | C7 | T4 |
| AIS | A | B | A |
| Post Injury (y) | 23 | 18 | 25 |
| UEMS (/50) | 50 | 34 | 50 |
| Pin Prick (/112) | 40 | 62 | 43 |
| Light Touch (/112) | 41 | 67 | 43 |
AIS American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale, UEMS upper extremity motor score. Higher scores on pin prick and light touch scales of the ISNCSCI indicate better sensory function
Fig. 1A picture of the seated balance control measurement setup; a participant is seated on the forceplate with feet off the ground, and b the computer monitor displays the limits of stability test (COP position – green dot, baseline limit – red box, movement direction – yellow arrow)
Fig. 2Gait speed is plotted for each training session per participant (P1 – solid black line, P2 – solid grey line, P3 – dotted black line). Gait speed was determined by the 10MWT for Ekso training, and the maximum speed achieved during Lokomat training
Fig. 3COP outcome measures are plotted for baseline 1, baseline 2, and post each intervention phase; mean COP RDIST, RVEL and AREA-CE of the static balance tasks (a eyes open and b eyes closed), and c mean total distance of the dynamic balance task
Summary of clinical measures of seated balance control
| T-Shirt Test | mFRT | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B1 | Ekso | Loko | Ekso | B1 | Ekso | Loko | Ekso | |
| P1 | 10.9 | 9.5 | 10.9 | 9.0 | 5.2 | 5.7 | 4.3 | 5.7 |
| P3 | 15.1 | 10.0 | 10.8 | 10.2 | 4.2 | 9.3 | 6.7 | 13.0 |
| B1 | Loko | Ekso | Loko | B1 | Loko | Ekso | Loko | |
| P2 | 17.9 | 14.7 | 12.9 | 13.4 | 3.3 | 6.3 | 9.0 | 6.0 |
B1 first baseline assessment, mFRT Modified Functional Reach Test
Fig. 4a the normalized muscle activity patterns of the rectus abdominis (RA), external oblique (EO), and erector spinae (ES) muscles are plotted over the gait cycle for P1 for all conditions; Ekso (EKSO –black line), and Lokomat (LOKO – grey line). The baseline activity (BAS – light grey shaded area) recorded during quiet lying is also displayed. b the average RMS amplitude across participants is plotted as a bar for each condition. Individual data from each participant is also displayed (P1 – circle, P2 – square, P3 – star)