| Literature DB >> 33109209 |
Alireza Noamani1, Jean-François Lemay2,3,4, Kristin E Musselman4,5, Hossein Rouhani6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Postural control is affected after incomplete spinal cord injury (iSCI) due to sensory and motor impairments. Any alteration in the availability of sensory information can challenge postural stability in this population and may lead to a variety of adaptive movement coordination patterns. Hence, identifying the underlying impairments and changes to movement coordination patterns is necessary for effective rehabilitation post-iSCI. This study aims to compare the postural control strategy between iSCI and able-bodied populations by quantifying the trunk-leg movement coordination under conditions that affects sensory information.Entities:
Keywords: Ankle strategy; Coherence; Hip strategy; Inertial measurement unit; Multi-joint coordination; Spinal cord injury
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33109209 PMCID: PMC7590439 DOI: 10.1186/s12984-020-00775-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Neuroeng Rehabil ISSN: 1743-0003 Impact factor: 4.262
Demographic information of participants
| Variable | Mean (standard deviation) | Range | |
|---|---|---|---|
| iSCI | Age (years) | 52.4 (20.5) | 20–87 |
| Height (cm) | 174.7 (7.8) | 161–188 | |
| Weight (kg) | 82.1 (18.3) | 57–113.4 | |
| Time post lesion (months) | 62.2 (70.1) | 27–289 | |
| Lower extremity motor score (/50) | 44.8 (4.3) | 32–49 | |
| Able-bodied | Age (years) | 39.4 (19.3) | 18–84 |
| Height (cm) | 170.5 (8.4) | 156–181 | |
| Weight (kg) | 69.8 (14.4) | 47.5–96 |
Demographic information of participants with incomplete spinal cord injury (iSCI); and demographic information of able-bodied participants
Fig. 1a Inertial measurement units (IMUs) were placed on the sacrum and the tibia of the right leg. b Acceleration signals in time-domain for trunk and leg segments for one participant for standing on a hard surface with eyes open. c Trunk–leg Magnitude-Squared Coherence (MSC) for iSCI population (red) and able-bodied (AB) individuals (blue) presented as an ensemble average (mean ± standard deviation) for both populations and each standing condition on hard surface (HS) and foam surface (FS) with eyes open (EO) and eyes closed (EC). d Cancellation-index indicating reciprocal action between the angular acceleration of the ankle and hip joints as presented for one participant from AB and iSCI populations for standing on a hard surface with eyes open
Balance biomarkers
| Outcome measure | Nomenclature | Type |
|---|---|---|
| Root-mean-square distance | RDIST | COP Time-domain distance measures |
| Mean distance | MDIST | |
| Total excursion | TOTEX | |
| Mean velocity | MVELO | |
| 95% Confidence ellipse area | Area-CE | COP area measure |
| Sway area | Area-SW | COP Time-domain hybrid measures |
| Mean frequency | MFREQ | |
| Median frequency | MEDFREQ | COP Frequency-domain measures |
| Centroid frequency | CFREQ | |
| Frequency dispersion | FREQD | |
| Sway jerkiness | JERK | COM acceleration-based measures |
| Root-mean-square acceleration | RMS-ACC | |
| Centroid frequency | CF-ACC | |
| Cancellation-index | CI | Trunk–leg acceleration pattern coordination |
| Magnitude-squared coherence | MSC |
As conventional outcome measures, a total of ten center-of-pressure (COP) measures were calculated according to [33]. In addition, three center-of-mass (COM) acceleration-based measures were used based on [19]. For movement coordination, we used cancellation index based on [30] and Magnitude-Squared Coherence (MSC) between trunk and leg segments
Magnitude-squared coherence
| (a) | Lower frequencies (f ≤ 1 Hz) | Higher frequencies (f > 1 Hz) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AB | iSCI | Cohen’s d | AB | iSCI | Cohen’s d | |
| HS-EO | [0.87, 0.88, 0.89] | [0.86, 0.89, 0.89] | 0.34 | [0.18, 0.21, 0.29] | [0.29, 0.44, 0.57] | 1.13 |
| HS-EC | [0.88, 0.89, 0.9] | [0.84, 0.88, 0.9] | 0.36 | [0.19, 0.24, 0.33] | [0.27, 0.44, 0.57] | 0.99 |
| FS-EO | [0.84, 0.89, 0.9] | [0.85, 0.9, 0.91] | 0.06 | [0.28, 0.34, 0.47] | [0.43, 0.49, 0.83] | 1.11 |
| FS-EC | [0.85, 0.89, 0.9] | [0.78, 0.9, 0.94] | 0.42 | [0.38, 0.59, 0.72] | [0.52, 0.78, 0.87] | 0.53 |
(a) Mean Magnitude-Squared Coherence (MSC) between trunk and leg accelerations presented as [25%, 50%, 75%] percentiles for able-bodied (AB) participants and individuals with incomplete spinal cord injury (iSCI) at lower and higher frequencies for different standing conditions as well as between-population Cohen’s d effect size. (b) Between-conditions Cohen’s d effect size for AB and iSCI populations at lower and higher frequencies. (c) Cancellation-index proposed by Kato et al. [30] as an indicator of trunk–leg reciprocal action presented as [25%, 50%, 75%] percentiles for AB and iSCI populations with between-population effect size for each standing condition. Cohen’s d effect size was defined as very small (d = 0.01), small (d = 0.20), medium (d = 0.50), large (d = 0.80), very large (d = 1.20), and huge (d = 2.00)
Statistical analysis on Mean Magnitude-Squared Coherence
| (a) | Main effects (p-value) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| iSCI vs. AB | FS vs. HS | EC vs. EO | ||||
| MSC (f ≤ 1 Hz) | 0.756 | 0.218 | 0.564 | |||
| MSC (f > 1 Hz) | 0.189 | |||||
| CI | 0.995 | 0.658 | ||||
Statistical analysis on Mean Magnitude-Squared Coherence (MSC) between trunk and leg accelerations at lower and higher frequencies and on cancellation-index (CI): (a) the main effect of health (iSCI vs AB), surface (FS vs. HS), and vision (EC vs, EO) conditions; and interaction effect of (b) surface and vision conditions, (c) health and surface conditions, and (d) health and vision conditions. Italic numbers show significant difference (p-value < 0.05)
Test–retest reliability
Test–retest reliability of conventional balance biomarkers [20] and Mean Magnitude-Squared Coherence (MSC) between trunk and leg accelerations at lower and higher frequencies for individuals with iSCI as measured by intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) across different standing conditions on foam (FS) and hard surfaces (HS) with eyes open (EO) and closed (EC)