Metabolic demand and muscle activation during different forms of bodyweight supported locomotion in men with incomplete SCI

Alyssa M Fenuta, Audrey L Hicks, Alyssa M Fenuta, Audrey L Hicks

Abstract

Body weight supported locomotor training uses neuroplasticity principles to improve recovery following a spinal cord injury (SCI). Steady state locomotion using the same body weight support (BWS) percent was compared in 7 males (42.6 ± 4.29 years) with incomplete SCI and matched (gender, age) noninjured controls (42.7 ± 5.4 years) using the Lokomat, Manual Treadmill, and ZeroG. The VO2000, Polar Heart Rate (HR) Monitor, and lower limb electromyography (EMG) electrodes were worn during the 2-minute sessions. Oxygen uptake (VO2) and HR were expressed as percentage of peak values obtained using progressive arm ergometry; VO2 was also expressed relative to resting metabolic equivalents (METS). Filtered EMG signals from tibialis anterior (TA), rectus femoris (RF), biceps femoris (BF), and medial gastrocnemius (MG) were normalized to ZeroG stepping. The Lokomat required 30% of VO2 peak (2METS) compared to ~54% (3METS) for Manual Treadmill and ZeroG sessions. HR was 67% of peak during Lokomat sessions compared to ~83% for Manual Treadmill and ZeroG. Muscle activation was higher in treadmill conditions compared to the ZeroG primarily due to increased BF activity. At the same level of BWS, locomotion using the Manual Treadmill or the ZeroG is more aerobically demanding than the Lokomat. Treadmill modalities encourage greater hip extensor activation compared to overground locomotion.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
(a) Body weight supported training devices used during walking sessions; from left to right: Manual Treadmill, Lokomat, and ZeroG. All devices provided body weight support (BWS) through a harness. The Andago GmbH treadmill (Loko) was used for robotic assisted (Lokomat) and unassisted (Manual Treadmill) walking sessions. The ZeroG had a custom series elastic actuator that traveled along an overhead trolley, which provided dynamic BWS while individuals performed overground walking sessions. (b) Manual Treadmill sessions normally completed with therapist assistance (not provided in this study) at both legs. The Andago GmbH treadmill is used during these sessions without the robotic orthosis providing individuals with greater degrees of freedom during training.
Figure 2
Figure 2
VO2 peak test variables for SCI and CON. Relative VO2 peak (mL/kg/min), peak heart rate (HR) expressed in beats per minute (BPM), and maximum power achieved (Watts). Values are mean ± SE.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Relationship of the lower limb flexion: extension strength ratios (at the hip and knee) determined using LForce on the Lokomat with the percentage of body weight support (BWS) required for locomotion using the ZeroG in participants with SCI. Open circles and solid line indicate the relationship at the hip. Closed squares and dashed line indicate the relationship at the knee. P < 0.05 = ∗.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Metabolic equivalents (METS) for SCI and CON during locomotion with body weight support (BWS). Solid line indicates significance between device comparisons, and dashed line indicates significance between group comparisons. P < 0.05 = ∗, P < 0.01 = ∗∗, and P < 0.001 = ∗∗∗.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Cardiovascular measures ((a) VO2, (b) HR) during locomotion with body weight support (BWS) expressed as percentage of peak values obtained from the arm ergometer test. Solid line indicates significance between device comparisons, and dashed line indicates significance between group comparisons. P < 0.05 = ∗, P < 0.01 = ∗∗, and P < 0.001 = ∗∗∗.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Muscle activity of independent muscle groups during treadmill locomotion with body weight support (BWS) normalized to ZeroG stepping with the same BWS. TA indicates tibialis anterior, RF indicates rectus femoris, BF indicates biceps femoris, MG indicates medial gastrocnemius, AVG indicates average muscle activity over a gait cycle, and 1GC indicates gait cycle completion time. Dashed line at 100 = value obtained while walking on the ZeroG. Statistically significant between group (SCI versus CON) comparisons P < 0.05 = ∗.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Ratio of root mean square (RMS) muscle activity across all muscle groups (μV) to oxygen uptake (%VO2 peak) between devices for SCI and CON. Mean ± standard error.

References

    1. Fenuta AM, Hicks AL. Body weight-supported treadmill training after spinal cord injury: is there an ideal prescription for intervention? Critical Reviews in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine. 2011;23(1–4):1161–4174.
    1. Barbeau H, Rossignol S. Recovery of locomotion after chronic spinalization in the adult cat. Brain Research. 1987;412(1):84–95.
    1. Dietz V, Harkema SJ. Locomotor activity in spinal cord-injured persons. Journal of Applied Physiology. 2004;96(5):1954–1960.
    1. Winchester P, McColl R, Querry R, et al. Changes in supraspinal activation patterns following robotic locomotor therapy in motor-incomplete spinal cord injury. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair. 2005;19(4):313–324.
    1. Alexeeva N, Sames C, Jacobs PL, et al. Comparison of training methods to improve walking in persons with chronic spinal cord injury: a randomized clinical trial. Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine. 2011;34(4):362–379.
    1. Dietz V. Body weight supported gait training: from laboratory to clinical setting. Brain Research Bulletin. 2008;76(5):459–463.
    1. Gorassini MA, Norton JA, Nevett-Duchcherer J, Roy FD, Yang JF. Changes in locomotor muscle activity after treadmill training in subjects with incomplete spinal cord injury. Journal of Neurophysiology. 2009;101(2):969–979.
    1. Protas EJ, Holmes SA, Qureshy H, Johnson A, Lee D, Sherwood AM. Supported treadmill ambulation training after spinal cord injury: a pilot study. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2001;82(6):825–831.
    1. Israel JF, Campbell DD, Kahn JH, Hornby TG. Metabolic costs and muscle activity patterns during robotic- and therapist-assisted treadmill walking in individuals with incomplete spinal cord injury. Physical Therapy. 2006;86(11):1466–1478.
    1. Hol AT, Eng JJ, Miller WC, Sproule S, Krassioukov AV. Reliability and validity of the six-minute arm test for the evaluation of cardiovascular fitness in people with spinal cord injury. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2007;88(4):489–495.
    1. Borg G. A category scale with ratio properties for intermodal and interindividual comparisons. Psychophysical Judgement and the process of perception. In: Geissler HG, Petzol P, editors. Proceedings of the 22nd International Congress of Psychology; 1980; Amsterdam, The Netherlands. North Holland; pp. 25–34.
    1. Bolliger M, Lunenburger L, Bircher S, Colombo G, Dietz V. Reliability of measuring isometric peak torque in the driven gait orthosis ‘Lokomat’. Neurorehabilitation & Neural Repair. 2006;20
    1. Collins EG, Gater D, Kiratli J, Butler J, Hanson K, Langbein WE. Energy cost of physical activities in persons with spinal cord injury. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. 2010;42(4):691–700.
    1. Janssen TWJ, Dallmeijer AJ, Veeger D, van der Woude LHV. Normative values and determinants of physical capacity in individuals with spinal cord injury. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development. 2002;39(1):29–39.
    1. van Loan MD, McCluer S, Loftin JM, Boileau RA. Comparison of physiological responses to maximal arm exercise among able-bodied, paraplegics and quadriplegics. Paraplegia. 1987;25(5):397–405.
    1. Cerny K, Waters R, Hislop H, Perry J. Walking and wheelchair energetics in persons with paraplegia. Physical Therapy. 1980;60(9):1133–1139.
    1. Phillips WT, Kiratli BJ, Sarkarati M, et al. Effect of spinal cord injury on the heart and cardiovascular fitness. Current Problems in Cardiology. 1998;23(11):641–716.
    1. Zwiren LD, Bar-Or O. Responses to exercise of paraplegics who differ in conditioning level. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. 1975;7(2):94–98.
    1. Ditunno J, Scivoletto G. Clinical relevance of gait research applied to clinical trials in spinal cord injury. Brain Research Bulletin. 2009;78(1):35–42.
    1. Yang JF, Norton J, Nevett-Duchcherer J, Roy FD, Gross DP, Gorassini MA. Volitional muscle strength in the legs predicts changes in walking speed following locomotor training in people with chronic spinal cord injury. Physical Therapy. 2011;91(6):931–943.
    1. Hornby TG, Kinnaird CR, Holleran CL, Rafferty MR, Rodriguez KS, Cain JB. Kinematic, muscular and metabolic responses during exoskeletal-, elliptical-, or therapist-assisted stepping in people with incomplete spinal cord injury. Physical Therapy. 2012;92:1278–1291.
    1. Krewer C, Müller F, Husemann B, Heller S, Quintern J, Koenig E. The influence of different Lokomat walking conditions on the energy expenditure of hemiparetic patients and healthy subjects. Gait and Posture. 2007;26(3):372–377.
    1. Waters RL, Mulroy S. The energy expenditure of normal and pathologic gait. Gait and Posture. 1999;9(3):207–231.
    1. Cerretelli P, Ambrosoli G, Fumagalli M. Anaerobic recovery in man. European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology. 1975;34(3):141–148.
    1. Waters RL, Hislop HJ, Perry J. Comparative cost of walking in young and old adults. Journal of Orthopaedic Research. 1983;1(1):73–76.
    1. Waters RL, Lunsford BR. Energy cost of paraplegic locomotion. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery A. 1985;67(8):1245–1250.
    1. da Cunha-Filho IT, Henson H, Qureshy H, Williams AL, Holmes SA, Protas EJ. Differential responses to measures of gait performance among healthy and neurologically impaired individuals. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2003;84(12):1774–1779.
    1. Brouwer B, Ashby P. Corticospinal projections to upper and lower limb spinal motoneurons in man. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology. 1990;76(6):509–519.
    1. Lucareli PR, Lima MO, Lima FPS, de Almeida JG, Brech GC, D’Andréa Greve JM. Gait analysis following treadmill training with body weight support versus conventional physical therapy: a prospective randomized controlled single blind study. Spinal Cord. 2011;49(9):1001–1007.
    1. Grasso R, Ivanenko YP, Zago M, et al. Distributed plasticity of locomotor pattern generators in spinal cord injured patients. Brain. 2004;127(5):1019–1034.
    1. Fenuta A, Hicks AL. Muscle activation during body weight-supported locomotion while using the ZeroG. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development. 2014;51(1):51–58.
    1. Ferris DP, Huang HJ, Kao P-C. Moving the arms to activate the legs. Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews. 2006;34(3):113–120.
    1. Winter DA. Biomechanical motor patterns in normal walking. Journal of Motor Behavior. 1983;15(4):302–330.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer og samarbeidspartnere

Medisinsk tilstand

Legemiddelintervensjoner

3
Abonnere