| Literature DB >> 31624745 |
Abstract
BACKGROUND: De-afferentation or non-weight bearing induces rapid cortical and spinal α-motor neuron excitability. Author supposed that an end-effector type gait robot (EEGR) could provide patients with a training condition that was specific enough to activate rapid cortical/spinal neuroplasticity, leading to immediate muscle strengthening. The electromyographic and biomechanical comparisons were conducted. AIM: To compare the electromyographic activities of the thigh and shank muscles and isometric peak torque (PT) before and after walking training on a floor or in the end-effector gait robot.Entities:
Keywords: Gait; Knee; Muscles; Neuronal plasticity; Rehabilitation; Robotics
Year: 2019 PMID: 31624745 PMCID: PMC6795730 DOI: 10.12998/wjcc.v7.i19.2976
Source DB: PubMed Journal: World J Clin Cases ISSN: 2307-8960 Impact factor: 1.337
Figure 1Picture of the end-effector type gait robot.
Figure 2Flow diagram.
Demographic characteristics
| 001 | 34 | M | 81.3 | 176.8 | Right | 2.3 | + |
| 002 | 38 | F | 70.0 | 163.1 | Right | 2.4 | |
| 003 | 27 | M | 78.0 | 177.9 | Right | 2.1 | |
| 004 | 34 | M | 85.0 | 172.9 | Right | 2.8 | |
| 005 | 28 | M | 85.0 | 186.1 | Right | 2.6 | |
| 006 | 30 | F | 50.3 | 160.5 | Right | 2.1 | |
| 007 | 22 | F | 54.0 | 156.2 | Right | 2.5 | |
| 008 | 24 | F | 70.0 | 169.8 | Right | 2.4 | |
| 009 | 35 | M | 74.0 | 178.0 | Left | 2.9 | |
| 010 | 24 | M | 70.0 | 180.1 | Right | 3.1 | |
| 011 | 49 | M | 60.0 | 174.9 | Left | 2.8 | |
| 012 | 45 | F | 63.0 | 174.0 | Right | 2.0 | + |
Comparison of peak torque and motor unit recruitment
| Knee flexors | |||
| Before intervention | 42.2 ± 15.7 | 10.9 - 73.5 | 71.2 ± 32.3 |
| After training on the floor | 51.4 ± 20.5 | 10.5 – 92.3 | 65.3 ± 19.7 |
| After training in the robot | 61.0 ± 24.2 | 12.7 - 109.4 | 68.0 ± 24.0 |
| Knee extensors | |||
| Before intervention | 85.6 ± 23.5 | 38.7 – 132.6 | 68.3 ± 6.2 |
| After training on the floor | 100.0 ± 29.8 | 40.5 - 159.5 | 70.5 ± 6.5 |
| After training in the robot | 104.4 ± 32.5 | 39.4 – 169.4 | 70.5 ± 8.8 |
P < 0.01 vs before intervention, Kruskal Wallis test.
P < 0.01 vs after training on the floor, Mann-Whitney test.
Comparison of the real-time electromyographic activities during five-minute training
| Biceps femoris long head | On the floor | 90.7 ± 0.3 | 473.3 ± 139.8 | 75.6 ± 11.6 | 13933489 ± 2142999 |
| In the robot | 90.1 ± 0.8 | 89.3 ± 8.5 | 16.4 ± 1.6 | 3028676 ± 296582 | |
| Vastus medialis | On the floor | 90.2 ± 0.6 | 517.2 ± 115.4 | 68.5 ± 12.2 | 12631555 ± 2240388 |
| In the robot | 89.8 ± 0.3 | 192.5 ± 23.6 | 42.2 ±3.1 | 7781851 ± 579361 | |
| Gastrocnemius medial head | On the floor | 90.1 ± 0.3 | 599.5 ± 124.4 | 89.2 ± 11.2 | 16444668 ± 2059635 |
| In the robot | 90.6 ± 1.1 | 142.9 ± 23.5 | 25.9 ± 4.8 | 4764851 ± 885854 | |
| Tibialis anterior | On the floor | 90.8 ± 0.5 | 812.8 ± 174.5 | 115.3 ± 19.6 | 21254,406 ± 3610903 |
| In the robot | 89.9 ± 0.4 | 92.0 ± 19.5 | 13.9 ± 2.2 | 2568851 ± 404428 |
P < 0.01, Wilcoxon sign rank test, mean ± SE. AUC: Area under curve.