Using robot-assisted stiffness perturbations to evoke aftereffects useful to post-stroke gait rehabilitation

Vaughn Chambers, Panagiotis Artemiadis, Vaughn Chambers, Panagiotis Artemiadis

Abstract

Stroke is a major global issue, affecting millions every year. When a stroke occurs, survivors are often left with physical disabilities or difficulties, frequently marked by abnormal gait. Post-stroke gait normally presents as one of or a combination of unilaterally shortened step length, decreased dorsiflexion during swing phase, and decreased walking speed. These factors lead to an increased chance of falling and an overall decrease in quality of life due to a reduced ability to locomote quickly and safely under one's own power. Many current rehabilitation techniques fail to show lasting results that suggest the potential for producing permanent changes. As technology has advanced, robot-assisted rehabilitation appears to have a distinct advantage, as the precision and repeatability of such an intervention are not matched by conventional human-administered therapy. The possible role in gait rehabilitation of the Variable Stiffness Treadmill (VST), a unique, robotic treadmill, is further investigated in this paper. The VST is a split-belt treadmill that can reduce the vertical stiffness of one of the belts, while the other belt remains rigid. In this work, we show that the repeated unilateral stiffness perturbations created by this device elicit an aftereffect of increased step length that is seen for over 575 gait cycles with healthy subjects after a single 10-min intervention. These long aftereffects are currently unmatched in the literature according to our knowledge. This step length increase is accompanied by kinematics and muscle activity aftereffects that help explain functional changes and have their own independent value when considering the characteristics of post-stroke gait. These results suggest that repeated unilateral stiffness perturbations could possibly be a useful form of post-stroke gait rehabilitation.

Keywords: adaptation; aftereffects; gait; rehabilitation; robotics; stroke; treadmill; walking.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Copyright © 2023 Chambers and Artemiadis.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Subject walking on the VST with both belts set to rigid. Reflective markers and EMGs can be seen on the subject, as well as the safety harness.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Experiment layout in terms of gait cycles. For the entire experiment, the stiffness of the right treadmill belt remained rigid (1 MN/m). The stiffness of the left treadmill belt was reduced to 45 kN/m for the adaptation phase. Otherwise, the left belt stiffness was also rigid.
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
Marker locations on each subject. Twenty-two reflective markers were used for motion capture analysis. The center of mass was estimated as the average between LASI, RASI, LPSI, and RSPI markers.
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 4
Left and right step length averaged for all 12 subjects. Step length was calculated as the projected distance between ankles in the floor plane at the time of heel strike. Both left and right step lengths are statistically significant for the entire observation phase, as indicated by the significance line. All significance testing was performed on “unsmoothed” data (seen in the lighter line). The darker line is the data smoothed by 2nd-degree polynomial local regression and was added only to allow the reader to more clearly see trends in the data.
FIGURE 5
FIGURE 5
Step length asymmetry averaged for all 12 subjects. Step length was calculated as the projected distance between ankles in the floor plane at the time of heel strike. For this figure, step length asymmetry was found by subtracting right step length from left step length. The right step length is significantly greater for the entire observation phase, as indicated by the significance line. All significance testing was performed on “unsmoothed” data (seen in the lighter line). The darker line is the data smoothed by 2nd-degree polynomial local regression and was added only to allow the reader to more clearly see trends in the data.
FIGURE 6
FIGURE 6
Hip and knee flexion/extension angles at heel strike for both left and right sides. Significance is shown in the observation phase as compared to the baseline phase by the significance line. All significance testing was performed on “unsmoothed” data (seen in the lighter line). The darker line is the data smoothed by 2nd-degree polynomial local regression and was added only to allow the reader to more clearly see trends in the data.
FIGURE 7
FIGURE 7
Maximum hip extension throughout the gait cycle for left and right legs. Note that values are positive because the extension angle was used instead of the flexion/extension angle for this figure. Significance is shown in the observation phase as compared to the baseline phase by the significance line. All significance testing was performed on “unsmoothed” data (seen in the lighter line). The darker line is the data smoothed by 2nd-degree polynomial local regression and was added only to allow the reader to more clearly see trends in the data.
FIGURE 8
FIGURE 8
The top two graphs display maximum left and right knee flexion/extension angle during the swing phase. The bottom two graphs show knee flexion/extension angle at the instant that toe-off occurs. Significance is shown in the observation phase as compared to the baseline phase by the significance line. All significance testing was performed on “unsmoothed” data (seen in the lighter line). The darker line is the data smoothed by 2nd-degree polynomial local regression and was added only to allow the reader to more clearly see trends in the data.
FIGURE 9
FIGURE 9
Maximum hip and knee angular velocities during the swing phase for both left and right legs. Significance is shown in the observation phase as compared to the baseline phase by the significance line. All significance testing was performed on “unsmoothed” data (seen in the lighter line). The darker line is the data smoothed by 2nd-degree polynomial local regression and was added only to allow the reader to more clearly see trends in the data.
FIGURE 10
FIGURE 10
Maximum vertical ground reaction force between midstance and toe-off for the left leg in percent body weight. Significance is shown in the observation phase as compared to the baseline phase by the significance line. All significance testing was performed on “unsmoothed” data (seen in the lighter line). The darker line is the data smoothed by 2nd-degree polynomial local regression and was added only to allow the reader to more clearly see trends in the data.
FIGURE 11
FIGURE 11
Average muscle activity during swing phase for all 10 muscles measured in this study: tibialis anterior, gastrocnemius, vastus medialis, rectus femoris, and biceps femoris. Significance is shown in the observation phase as compared to the baseline phase by the significance line. All significance testing was performed on “unsmoothed” data (seen in the lighter line). The darker line is the data smoothed by 2nd-degree polynomial local regression and was added only to allow the reader to more clearly see trends in the data.
FIGURE 12
FIGURE 12
Gait cycle length with respect to time (measured from left heel strike to left heel strike). Significance is shown in the observation phase as compared to the baseline phase by the significance line. All significance testing was performed on “unsmoothed” data (seen in the lighter line). The darker line is the data smoothed by 2nd-degree polynomial local regression and was added only to allow the reader to more clearly see trends in the data.
FIGURE 13
FIGURE 13
Sections of the gait cycle displayed with respect to how much of the entire gait cycle they occupy (in terms of percentage). The double support phase is determined to be left or right depending on which foot is in front and has more recently achieved heel strike. Significance is shown in the observation phase as compared to the baseline phase by the significance line. All significance testing was performed on “unsmoothed” data (seen in the lighter line). The darker line is the data smoothed by 2nd-degree polynomial local regression and was added only to allow the reader to more clearly see trends in the data.
FIGURE 14
FIGURE 14
Swing and stance time asymmetry in terms of time. For the swing phase, asymmetry was found by subtracting the time spent in right swing from the time spent in left swing. For the stance phase, the same process was used. Significance is shown in the observation phase as compared to the baseline phase by the significance line. All significance testing was performed on “unsmoothed” data (seen in the lighter line). The darker line is the data smoothed by 2nd-degree polynomial local regression and was added only to allow the reader to more clearly see trends in the data.
FIGURE 15
FIGURE 15
Left and right anterior step length averaged for all 12 subjects. Anterior step length was calculated as the anterior/posterior distance between the center of mass and the leading heel at heel strike. Significance is shown in the observation phase as compared to the baseline phase by the significance line. All significance testing was performed on “unsmoothed” data (seen in the lighter line). The darker line is the data smoothed by 2nd-degree polynomial local regression and was added only to allow the reader to more clearly see trends in the data.

References

    1. Balaban B., Tok F. (2014). Gait disturbances in patients with stroke. PM&R 6, 635–642. 10.1016/j.pmrj.2013.12.017
    1. Barkan A., Skidmore J., Artemiadis P. (2014). “Variable stiffness treadmill (VST): A novel tool for the investigation of gait,” in Proceedings - IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (Hong Kong, China: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.), 2838–2843. 10.1109/ICRA.2014.6907266
    1. Chambers V., Artemiadis P. (2021). A model-based analysis of supraspinal mechanisms of inter-leg coordination in human gait: Toward model-informed robot-assisted rehabilitation. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabilitation Eng. 29, 740–749. 10.1109/tnsre.2021.3072771
    1. Chambers V., Artemiadis P. (2022). “Repeated robot-assisted unilateral stiffness perturbations result in significant aftereffects relevant to post-stroke gait rehabilitation,” in IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA) (IEEE; ), 5426–5433.
    1. Chen G., Patten C., Kothari D. H., Zajac F. E. (2005). Gait differences between individuals with post-stroke hemiparesis and non-disabled controls at matched speeds. Gait Posture 22, 51–56. 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2004.06.009
    1. Choi J. T., Bastian A. J. (2007). Adaptation reveals independent control networks for human walking. Nat. Neurosci. 10, 1055–1062. 10.1038/NN1930
    1. Daly J. J., Roenigk K., Cheng R., Ruff R. L. (2010). Abnormal leg muscle latencies and relationship to dyscoordination and walking disability after stroke. Rehabilitation Res. Pract. 2011, 1–8. 10.1155/2011/313980
    1. Daly J. J., Ruff R. L. (2007). Construction of efficacious gait and upper limb functional interventions based on brain plasticity evidence and model-based measures for stroke patients. Discuss. Pap. TheScientificWorldJOURNAL 7, 2031–2045. 10.1100/tsw.2007.299
    1. de Haan R. J., Limburg M., Van der Meulen J. H., Jacobs H. M., Aaronson N. K. (1995). Quality of life after stroke. Impact of stroke type and lesion location. Stroke 26, 402–408. 10.1161/01.str.26.3.402
    1. Demarin V., Morović S. (2014). Neuroplasticity. Period. Biol. 116, 209–211.
    1. Den Otter A. R., Geurts A. C. H., Mulder T., Duysens J. (2007). Abnormalities in the temporal patterning of lower extremity muscle activity in hemiparetic gait. Gait Posture 25, 342–352. 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2006.04.007
    1. Duncan P. W., Zorowitz R., Bates B., Choi J. Y., Glasberg J. J., Graham G. D., et al. (2005). Management of adult stroke rehabilitation care: A clinical practice guideline. Stroke 36, e100–e143. 10.1161/01.str.0000180861.54180.ff
    1. Feigin V. L., Brainin M., Norrving B., Martins S., Sacco R. L., Hacke W., et al. (2022). World stroke organization (WSO): Global stroke fact sheet 2022. Int. J. Stroke 17, 18–29. 10.1177/17474930211065917
    1. Forrester L. W., Roy A., Krebs H. I., Macko R. F. (2011). Ankle training with a robotic device improves hemiparetic gait after a stroke. Neurorehabilitation Neural Repair 25, 369–377. 10.1177/1545968310388291
    1. Haynes W. (2013). “Wilcoxon rank sum test,” in Encyclopedia of systems biology. Editors Dubitzky W., Wolkenhauer O., Cho K.-H., Yokota H. (New York, NY: Springer New York; ), 2354–2355. 10.1007/978-1-4419-9863-7_1185
    1. Hesse S., Konrad M., Uhlenbrock D. (1999). Treadmill walking with partial body weight support versus floor walking in hemiparetic subjects. Archives Phys. Med. Rehabilitation 80, 421–427. 10.1016/S0003-9993(99)90279-4
    1. Hirata K., Hanawa H., Miyazawa T., Kubota K., Sonoo M., Kokubun T., et al. (2019). Adaptive changes in foot placement for split-belt treadmill walking in individuals with stroke. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 48, 112–120. 10.1016/j.jelekin.2019.07.003
    1. Hobbs B., Artemiadis P. (2020). A Review of robot-assisted lower-limb stroke therapy: Unexplored paths and future directions in gait rehabilitation. Front. Neurorobotics 14, 19. 10.3389/fnbot.2020.00019
    1. Hobbs B., Artemiadis P. (2022). “A systematic method for outlier detection in human gait data,” in 2022 IEEE 17th international conference on rehabilitation robotics (ICORR) (IEEE; ), 1–6.
    1. Huang V. S., Haith A., Mazzoni P., Krakauer J. W. (2011). Rethinking motor learning and savings in adaptation paradigms: Model-free memory for successful actions combines with internal models. Neuron 70, 787–801. 10.1016/j.neuron.2011.04.012
    1. Husemann B., Müller F., Krewer C., Heller S., Koenig E. (2007). Effects of locomotion training with assistance of a robot-driven gait orthosis in hemiparetic patients after stroke. Stroke 38, 349–354. 10.1161/01.STR.0000254607.48765.cb
    1. Huynh K. V., Sarmento C. H., Roemmich R. T., Stegemöller E. L., Hass C. J. (2014). Comparing aftereffects after split-belt treadmill walking and unilateral stepping. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 46, 1392–1399. 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000240
    1. Intiso D., Santilli V., Grasso M. G., Rossi R., Caruso I. (1994). Rehabilitation of walking with electromyographic biofeedback in foot-drop after stroke. Stroke 25, 1189–1192. 10.1161/01.str.25.6.1189
    1. Karakasis C., Artemiadis P. (2021). Real-time kinematic-based detection of foot-strike during walking. J. Biomechanics 129, 110849. 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2021.110849
    1. Little V. L., McGuirk T. E., Patten C. (2014). Impaired limb shortening following stroke: What’s in a name? PloS One 9, e110140. 10.1371/journal.pone.0110140
    1. Mackintosh S. F., Hill K. D., Dodd K. J., Goldie P. A., Culham E. G. (2006). Balance score and a history of falls in hospital predict recurrent falls in the 6 months following stroke rehabilitation. Archives Phys. Med. Rehabilitation 87, 1583–1589. 10.1016/j.apmr.2006.09.004
    1. Matsuda F., Mukaino M., Ohtsuka K., Tanikawa H., Tsuchiyama K., Teranishi T., et al. (2017). Biomechanical factors behind toe clearance during the swing phase in hemiparetic patients. Top. Stroke Rehabilitation 24, 177–182. 10.1080/10749357.2016.1234192
    1. Nadeau S. (2014). Understanding spatial and temporal gait asymmetries in individuals post stroke. Int. J. Phys. Med. Rehabilitation 02. 10.4172/2329-9096.1000201
    1. Nilsson A., Vreede K. S., Häglund V., Kawamoto H., Sankai Y., Borg J. (2014). Gait training early after stroke with a new exoskeleton – the hybrid assistive limb: A study of safety and feasibility. J. NeuroEngineering Rehabilitation 11, 92. 10.1186/1743-0003-11-92
    1. Olney S. J., Richards C. (1996). Hemiparetic gait following stroke. Part I: Characteristics. Gait Posture 4, 136–148. 10.1016/0966-6362(96)01063-6
    1. Patterson K. K., Gage W. H., Brooks D., Black S. E., McIlroy W. E. (2010). Evaluation of gait symmetry after stroke: A comparison of current methods and recommendations for standardization. Gait Posture 31, 241–246. 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2009.10.014
    1. Patterson K. K., Parafianowicz I., Danells C. J., Closson V., Verrier M. C., Staines W. R., et al. (2008). Gait asymmetry in community-ambulating stroke survivors. Archives Phys. Med. Rehabilitation 89, 304–310. 10.1016/j.apmr.2007.08.142
    1. Peshkin M., Brown D. A., Santos-Munné J. J., Makhlin A., Lewis E., Colgate J. E., et al. (2005). “KineAssist: A robotic overground gait and balance training device,” in Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE 9th international conference on rehabilitation robotics, 2005, 241–246. 10.1109/ICORR.2005.1501094
    1. Reinkensmeyer D. J., Patton J. L. (2009). Can robots help the learning of skilled actions? Exerc. sport Sci. Rev. 37, 43–51. 10.1097/JES.0b013e3181912108
    1. Reinkensmeyer D., Wynne J., Harkema S. (2002). “A robotic tool for studying locomotor adaptation and rehabilitation,” in Proceedings of the second joint 24th annual conference and the annual fall meeting of the biomedical engineering society] [engineering in medicine and biology, 3, 2353–2354. 10.1109/IEMBS.2002.1053318
    1. Reisman D. S., Block H. J., Bastian A. J. (2005). Interlimb coordination during locomotion: What can be adapted and stored? J. Neurophysiology 94, 2403–2415. 10.1152/jn.00089.2005
    1. Reisman D. S., McLean H., Keller J., Danks K. A., Bastian A. J. (2013). Repeated split-belt treadmill training improves poststroke step length asymmetry. Neurorehabilitation neural repair 27, 460–468. 10.1177/1545968312474118
    1. Reisman D. S., Wityk R., Silver K., Bastian A. J. (2007). Locomotor adaptation on a split-belt treadmill can improve walking symmetry post-stroke. Brain a J. neurology 130, 1861–1872. 10.1093/BRAIN/AWM035
    1. Reisman D. S., Wityk R., Silver K., Bastian A. J. (2009). Split-belt treadmill adaptation transfers to overground walking in persons poststroke. Neurorehabilitation Neural Repair 23, 735–744. 10.1177/1545968309332880
    1. Sale P., Franceschini M., Waldner A., Hesse S. (2012). Use of the robot assisted gait therapy in rehabilitation of patients with stroke and spinal cord injury. Eur. J. Phys. rehabilitation Med. 48, 111–121.
    1. Seiterle S., Susko T., Artemiadis P. K., Riener R., Igo Krebs H. (2015). Interlimb coordination in body-weight supported locomotion: A pilot study. J. Biomechanics 48, 2837–2843. 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2015.04.042
    1. Shiavi R., Frigo C., Pedotti A. (1998). Electromyographic signals during gait: Criteria for envelope filtering and number of strides. Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. 36, 171–178. 10.1007/BF02510739
    1. Singh R. E., Igbal K., White G., Holtz J. K. (2019). “A Review of EMG techniques for detection of gait disorders,” in Artificial intelligence: Applications in medicine and biology (London, United Kingdom: BoD – Books on Demand; ), 19–36.
    1. Skidmore J., Artemiadis P. (2019). “A comprehensive analysis of sensorimotor mechanisms of inter-leg coordination in gait using the variable stiffness treadmill: Physiological insights for improved robot-assisted gait therapy,” in 2019 IEEE 16th international conference on rehabilitation robotics (ICORR), 28–33. 10.1109/ICORR.2019.8779466
    1. Skidmore J., Artemiadis P. (2015). “Leg muscle activation evoked by floor stiffness perturbations: A novel approach to robot-assisted gait rehabilitation,” in 2015 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA), 6463–6468. 10.1109/ICRA.2015.7140107
    1. Skidmore J., Artemiadis P. (2016a). On the effect of walking surface stiffness on inter-limb coordination in human walking: Toward bilaterally informed robotic gait rehabilitation. J. NeuroEngineering Rehabilitation 13, 32. 10.1186/s12984-016-0140-y
    1. Skidmore J., Artemiadis P. (2016b). “Sudden changes in walking surface compliance evoke contralateral EMG in a hemiparetic walker: A case study of inter-leg coordination after neurological injury,” in 2016 38th annual international conference of the IEEE engineering in medicine and biology society (EMBC) (IEEE; ), 4682–4685. 10.1109/EMBC.2016.7591772
    1. Skidmore J., Artemiadis P. (2016c). Unilateral floor stiffness perturbations systematically evoke contralateral leg muscle responses: A new approach to robot-assisted gait therapy. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabilitation Eng. 24, 467–474. 10.1109/TNSRE.2015.2421822
    1. Skidmore J., Artemiadis P. (2016d). “Unilateral walking surface stiffness perturbations evoke brain responses: Toward bilaterally informed robot-assisted gait rehabilitation,” in Proceedings - IEEE international Conference on Robotics and automation (IEEE), 2016, 3698–3703. 10.1109/ICRA.2016.7487555
    1. Skidmore J., Barkan A., Artemiadis P. (2015). Variable stiffness treadmill (VST): System development, characterization, and preliminary experiments. IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics 20, 1717–1724. 10.1109/TMECH.2014.2350456
    1. Smith L. C., Hanley B. (2013). Comparisons between swing phase characteristics of race walkers and distance runners. Int. J. Exerc. Sci. 6 (9), 269–277.
    1. Su Y. R. S., Veeravagu A., Grant G. (2016). “Neuroplasticity after traumatic brain injury,” in Translational research in traumatic brain injury (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; ), 163–178. 10.1201/b18959-9
    1. Titianova E. B., Pitkänen K., Pääkkönen A., Sivenius J., Tarkka I. M. (2003). Gait characteristics and functional ambulation profile in patients with chronic unilateral stroke. Am. J. Phys. Med. Rehabilitation 82, 778–786. 10.1097/01.PHM.0000087490.74582.E0
    1. Ugur C., Gücüyener D., Uzuner N., Özkan S., Özdemir G. (2000). Characteristics of falling in patients with stroke. J. Neurology, Neurosurg. Psychiatry 69, 649–651. 10.1136/jnnp.69.5.649
    1. Von Schroeder H. P., Coutts R. D., Lyden P. D., Billings E., Nickel V. L. (1995). Gait parameters following stroke: A practical assessment. J. rehabilitation Res. Dev. 32, 25–31.
    1. Westhout F. D., Pare L. S., Linskey M. E. (2007). Central causes of foot drop: Rare and underappreciated differential diagnoses. J. Spinal Cord Med. 30, 62–66. 10.1080/10790268.2007.11753915

Source: PubMed

3
구독하다