| Literature DB >> 34153069 |
David Jiménez-Grande1, S Farokh Atashzar2, Eduardo Martinez-Valdes1, Deborah Falla1.
Abstract
Neuromuscular impairments are frequently observed in patients with chronic neck pain (CNP). This study uniquely investigates whether changes in neck muscle synergies detected during gait are sensitive enough to differentiate between people with and without CNP. Surface electromyography (EMG) was recorded from the sternocleidomastoid, splenius capitis, and upper trapezius muscles bilaterally from 20 asymptomatic individuals and 20 people with CNP as they performed rectilinear and curvilinear gait. Intermuscular coherence was computed to generate the functional inter-muscle connectivity network, the topology of which is quantified based on a set of graph measures. Besides the functional network, spectrotemporal analysis of each EMG was used to form the feature set. With the use of Neighbourhood Component Analysis (NCA), we identified the most significant features and muscles for the classification/differentiation task conducted using K-Nearest Neighbourhood (K-NN), Support Vector Machine (SVM), and Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA) algorithms. The NCA algorithm selected features from muscle network topology as one of the most relevant feature sets, which further emphasize the presence of major differences in muscle network topology between people with and without CNP. Curvilinear gait achieved the best classification performance through NCA-SVM based on only 16 features (accuracy: 85.00%, specificity: 81.81%, and sensitivity: 88.88%). Intermuscular muscle networks can be considered as a new sensitive tool for the classification of people with CNP. These findings further our understanding of how fundamental muscle networks are altered in people with CNP.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34153069 PMCID: PMC8216529 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0252657
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Experimental setup.
Curvilinear task (left) and rectilinear task (right).
Mathematical definitions of EMG features.
| Features | Mathematical definitions |
|---|---|
| Time domain | |
| Mean absolute value (MAV) | |
| where xi represents ith sample of the EMG signal, and N denotes the total number of samples in a signal window. | |
| Root mean square (RMS) | |
| Variance (VAR) | |
| Waveform length (WL) | |
| Simple square integral (SSI) | |
| Frequency domain | |
| Mean Frequency (MNF) | |
| where | |
| Median frequency (MDF) | |
| Peak Frequency (PKF) | |
| Mean power (MNP) | |
| Total power (TTP) | |
Fig 2Block diagram of the methodology proposed.
Demographic characteristics of participants.
| Neck pain | Control | p | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | ||
| Age (years) | 28.5 ± 9.0 | 26.3 ± 8.8 | 0.33 |
| Weight (kg) | 66.2 ± 12.4 | 65.2 ± 13.7 | 0.40 |
| Height (cm) | 171.0 ± 9.9 | 169.1 ± 7.4 | 0.24 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 38.5 ± 5.6 | 38.4 ± 6.9 | 0.47 |
| Gender (female %) | 60% | 50% | - |
| Average neck pain intensity (0–10) | 4.1 ± 1.9 | - | - |
*Independent samples t-test, SD: Standard deviation, BMI: Body Mass Index.
Classification performance for each trajectory.
| Curvilinear | Rectilinear | Combine | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| All features | ||||
| K-NN | ACCU | 62.00% | 35.00% | 37.00% |
| SPEC | 61.90% | 35.00% | 37.50% | |
| SENS | 63.15% | 35.00% | 37.50% | |
| SVM | ACCU | 45.00% | 32.50% | 56.25% |
| SPEC | 45.00% | 31.57% | 56.41% | |
| SENS | 45.00% | 33.33% | 56.10% | |
| LDA | ACCU | 65.00% | 42.50% | 47.50% |
| SPEC | 65.00% | 42.85% | 47.36% | |
| SENS | 65.00% | 42.10% | 47.62% | |
| Selected features by NCA | ||||
| K-NN | ACCU | 80.00% | 55.00% | 60.00% |
| SPEC | 83.33% | 54.54% | 58.69% | |
| SENS | 78.94% | 55.55% | 61.76% | |
| SVM | ACCU | 85.00% | 55.00% | 62.50% |
| SPEC | 81.81% | 60.00% | 60.46% | |
| SENS | 88.88% | 54.17% | 62.50% | |
| LDA | ACCU | 75.00% | 55.00% | 56.25% |
| SPEC | 72.72% | 56.25% | 58.06% | |
| SENS | 77.77% | 55.00% | 55.10% | |
ACCU: accuracy, SPEC: specificity, SENS: sensitivity.
Fig 3NCA weights of the features for each gait trajectory grouped by muscle.
The higher the value, the more important it is. Weights from the left and right muscle are pooled.
Fig 4Dependence of % classification accuracy on the number of features selected by NCA.
Selected features by NCA.
| Curvilinear | Rectilinear | Combine | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Muscles | Side | Features | FW | Features | FW | Features | FW |
| SCM | R | VAR | 2.409 | MAV | 4.097 | MAV | 0.100 |
| L | VAR | 1.817 | - | - | VAR | 3.565 | |
| SC | L | VAR | 0.881 | - | - | - | - |
| UT | R | MNF | 1.046 | - | - | - | - |
| L | MAV | 0.245 | - | - | - | - | |
*FW: Feature weight (discriminative power), R: right, L: left.
Fig 5Classification performance for each gait trajectory for each muscle.
Network parameters.
| Curvilinear | Rectilinear | p | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strength | CNP | 0.901±0.06 | 0.913±0.04 | P > 0.05 |
| Control | 0.933±0.04 | 0.923±0.03 | ||
| BC | CNP | 0.034±0.02 | 0.046±0.03 | P < 0.05 |
| Control | 0.015±0.06 | 0.029±0.02 |
Fig 6Functional networks of CNP and control groups during curvilinear and rectilinear task at delta band.
Orange nodes represents left side muscles and blue nodes the right-side ones.