| Literature DB >> 32883297 |
Blynn L Shideler1, Thomas C Bulea1, Ji Chen1, Christopher J Stanley1, Andrew J Gravunder1, Diane L Damiano2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) has been utilized for many years in cerebral palsy (CP) with limited success despite its inherent potential for improving muscle size and/or strength, inhibiting or reducing spasticity, and enhancing motor performance during functional activities such as gait. While surface NMES has been shown to successfully improve foot drop in CP and stroke, correction of more complex gait abnormalities in CP such as flexed knee (crouch) gait remains challenging due to the level of stimulation needed for the quadriceps muscles that must be balanced with patient tolerability and the ability to deliver NMES assistance at precise times within a gait cycle.Entities:
Keywords: Crouch gait; Exoskeleton; Functional electrical stimulation (FES); Graphical user interface (GUI)
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32883297 PMCID: PMC7469320 DOI: 10.1186/s12984-020-00738-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Neuroeng Rehabil ISSN: 1743-0003 Impact factor: 4.262
Fig. 1The custom-designed digitally-controlled surface NMES system. a custom printed circuit board (PCB) wiring schematic and b printed board that houses a Teensy 3.2 microcontroller, a system of 21 Omron Electronic Components G6L-1P-DC3 SPST-NO electromechanical relays, and inputs for a LiPo battery and external digital input signals, with scale bar for reference. c schematic of the NMES system and d wired system prototype. e a 3D model of the custom protective case and f the enclosed system used for this study
Fig. 2A graphical user interface (GUI) to communicate with the Teensy 3.2 microcontroller operating the neuromuscular electrical stimulator for digital calibration and control of the neuromuscular electrical stimulation
Fig. 3a Schematic of the synchronized neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) and exoskeleton communication. The NMES device is calibrated under complete digital control from a Teensy 3.2 microcontroller and system of electromechanical relays housed on a printed circuit board (PCB). Front-end calibration occurs on a Python desktop graphical user interface. The NMES synchronizes with the exoskeleton motor control via digital input from the exoskeleton’s finite state machine. b Schematic of the gait cycle, showing how the timing of stimulation delivery during stance phase as determined by the Finite State Machine (FSM) deviates slightly from the traditional biomechanical definition
Fig. 4Representation of the experimental setup for clinical testing of walking in the pediatric robotic exoskeleton with synchronized NMES across the Functional & Applied Biomechanics Laboratory in the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center
Fig. 5Benchtop testing neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) output synchronized with a state change detected by the finite state machine (FSM) of the pediatric robotic exoskeleton; one simulated state change with aligned signals from the NMES and FSM shown for example. Normalized output = 1 indicates stance phase on the FSM and maximum voltage from the NMES
Fig. 6Knee angle profiles averaged for each gait cycle during all four walking conditions in a left leg and b right leg. Average profile over all gait cycles shown in bold for each condition with transparent spread representing ±1 standard deviation. Black bars along horizontal axes show the average gait cycle duration ±1 standard deviation when electrical stimulation was administered in each limb. The average knee angle profile of a healthy gait pattern from a previous study [20] is shown in grey for reference
Primary outcome measures
Abbreviations—VL Vastus Lateralis, RF Rectus Femoris
1Grey shading shows prescribed AFO condition that was not included in repeated-measures ANOVA
†Significant difference (p < 0.05) between prescribed AFO baseline and baseline exoskeleton (zero assistance) walking assessed by paired t-tests
*Significant effect of condition at the α = 0.05 level assessed by repeated measures ANOVA
**Significant difference from baseline exoskeleton in post-hoc analysis at the α = 0.05 level with Bonferonni correction