A neuromechanics-based powered ankle exoskeleton to assist walking post-stroke: a feasibility study

Kota Z Takahashi, Michael D Lewek, Gregory S Sawicki, Kota Z Takahashi, Michael D Lewek, Gregory S Sawicki

Abstract

Background: In persons post-stroke, diminished ankle joint function can contribute to inadequate gait propulsion. To target paretic ankle impairments, we developed a neuromechanics-based powered ankle exoskeleton. Specifically, this exoskeleton supplies plantarflexion assistance that is proportional to the user's paretic soleus electromyography (EMG) amplitude only during a phase of gait when the stance limb is subjected to an anteriorly directed ground reaction force (GRF). The purpose of this feasibility study was to examine the short-term effects of the powered ankle exoskeleton on the mechanics and energetics of gait.

Methods: Five subjects with stroke walked with a powered ankle exoskeleton on the paretic limb for three 5 minute sessions. We analyzed the peak paretic ankle plantarflexion moment, paretic ankle positive work, symmetry of GRF propulsion impulse, and net metabolic power.

Results: The exoskeleton increased the paretic plantarflexion moment by 16% during the powered walking trials relative to unassisted walking condition (p < .05). Despite this enhanced paretic ankle moment, there was no significant increase in paretic ankle positive work, or changes in any other mechanical variables with the powered assistance. The exoskeleton assistance appeared to reduce the net metabolic power gradually with each 5 minute repetition, though no statistical significance was found. In three of the subjects, the paretic soleus activation during the propulsion phase of stance was reduced during the powered assistance compared to unassisted walking (35% reduction in the integrated EMG amplitude during the third powered session).

Conclusions: This feasibility study demonstrated that the exoskeleton can enhance paretic ankle moment. Future studies with greater sample size and prolonged sessions are warranted to evaluate the effects of the powered ankle exoskeleton on overall gait outcomes in persons post-stroke.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Illustration of the proportional myoelectric propulsion (PMP) powered exoskeleton. The soleus electromyography (EMG) and anterior-posterior ground reaction force (GRF) from an instrumented treadmill were collected in real-time to control the magnitude and timing of exoskeleton actuation. The proportional myoelectric propulsion (PMP) controller supplies plantarflexion moment proportional to the soleus EMG activity only during a phase of gait when the stance limb is subjected to an anteriorly directed ground reaction force. The red highlighted region denotes the duration in which the exoskeleton is activated.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Paretic limb data (three steps) from a representative subject with and without the powered exoskeleton. During the powered walking (POWx3), the exoskeleton control signal was generated with magnitude proportional to the paretic soleus EMG (blue) only when the anterior-posterior GRF (black) was greater than 0 (region highlighted in red). Positive GRF denotes anterior (i.e., propulsive) force. During this phase, the exoskeleton supplied plantarflexion moment during late stance (red), contributing to the increased total ankle moment (gray) relative to the NoEXO condition. We note that there is a delay between the onset of the control signal and the onset of the exoskeleton moment (lag of approximately 83 ms).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Ankle joint mechanics (averaged over 5 subjects). Sagittal plane data (time-normalized to 101 data points across gait cycle) of paretic and non-paretic ankle mechanics (angle, moment, power) were analyzed from the last minute of each condition (NoEXO – black; UnPOW – red; POWx3 – blue). For clarity, data from POWx1 and POWx2 are not shown. The two vertical lines define the propulsion phase of stance (i.e., onset of propulsion and toe-off). During POW conditions, the exoskeleton generated plantarflexion moment during late stance (shown in dotted blue), and contributed to the increased total paretic moment (16% increase during POW relative to NoEXO, p < 0.05).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Paretic ankle positive work (averaged over 5 subjects). The paretic ankle joint positive work (J kg−1) across conditions of NoEXO (black), UnPOW (red), and three repetitions of POW (blue) were analyzed from the last minute of each condition. The exoskeleton’s contributions to the total positive work during POW are denoted in white. There was no statistically significant effect of the exoskeleton on the paretic ankle joint positive work (p =0.58). The error bars represent ± 1.0 standard deviation.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Anterior-posterior ground reaction force and percent paretic propulsion (averaged over 5 subjects). Anterior-posterior GRF data (time-normalized to 101 data points across gait cycle) of paretic and non-paretic lower extremities were analyzed from the last minute of each condition (NoEXO – black; UnPOW – red; POWx3 – blue). For clarity, time-series data from POWx1 and POWx2 are not shown. The two vertical lines define the propulsion phase of stance (i.e., onset of propulsion and toe-off). The percent paretic propulsion (described by Bowden et al. [44]) signifies the symmetry of the propulsion impulse (less than 50% indicates greater reliance on the non-paretic limb for propulsion). There was no statistically significant effect of the exoskeleton on the percent paretic propulsion (p = 0.81).
Figure 6
Figure 6
Whole-body net metabolic power (averaged over 5 subjects). Whole-body net metabolic power (W kg-1) across conditions of NoEXO (black), UnPOW (red), and three repetitions of POW (blue) were analyzed. Although there was no statistically significant effect of the exoskeleton on net metabolic power (p = 0.21), there was a tendency for a gradual reduction of metabolic cost with each bout of the powered walking conditions. The percent change values are expressed relative to the NoEXO condition. The error bars represent ± 1.0 standard deviation.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Linear-enveloped EMG and magnitude of time-integrated EMG during the propulsion phase (averaged over 3 subjects). EMG signals of SOL and TA (from paretic and non-paretic limbs) were analyzed during the last minute of each condition. Linear-enveloped EMG data (time-normalized to 101 data points across gait cycle) from NoEXO (black), UnPOW (red), and POWx3 (blue) are shown (but linear-enveloped EMG data for POWx1 and POWx2 are not for clarity). The two vertical lines define the propulsion phase of stance (i.e., onset of propulsion and toe-off). The magnitude of integrated EMG (iEMG) during the propulsion phase showed reduced paretic SOL activity (i.e., muscle that controlled the exoskeleton assistance) during all three POW conditions relative to NoEXO. The error bars represent ± 1.0 standard deviation. We note that two subjects’ EMG data were omitted due to technical difficulties, and thus we did not perform statistical analysis on EMG data because of the small sample size.

References

    1. Perry J, Garrett M, Gronley JK, Mulroy SJ. Classification of walking handicap in the stroke population. Stroke. 1995;26:982–989. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.26.6.982.
    1. Patterson KK, Parafianowicz I, Danells CJ, Closson V, Verrier MC, Staines WR, et al. Gait asymmetry in community-ambulating stroke survivors. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;89:304–310. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2007.08.142.
    1. Patterson KK, Gage WH, Brooks D, Black SE, McIlroy WE. Changes in gait symmetry and velocity after stroke: a cross-sectional study from weeks to years after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010;24:783–790. doi: 10.1177/1545968310372091.
    1. Stoquart G, Detrembleur C, Lejeune TM. The reasons why stroke patients expend so much energy to walk slowly. Gait Posture. 2012;36:409–413. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2012.03.019.
    1. Waters RL, Mulroy S. The energy expenditure of normal and pathologic gait. Gait Posture. 1999;9:207–231. doi: 10.1016/S0966-6362(99)00009-0.
    1. Olney SJ, Griffin MP, Monga TN, McBride ID. Work and power in gait of stroke patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1991;72:309–314.
    1. Chen G, Patten C. Joint moment work during the stance-to-swing transition in hemiparetic subjects. J Biomech. 2008;41:877–883. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2007.10.017.
    1. Jonkers I, Delp S, Patten C. Capacity to increase walking speed is limited by impaired hip and ankle power generation in lower functioning persons post-stroke. Gait Posture. 2009;29:129–137. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2008.07.010.
    1. Jonsdottir J, Recalcati M, Rabuffetti M, Casiraghi A, Boccardi S, Ferrarin M. Functional resources to increase gait speed in people with stroke: strategies adopted compared to healthy controls. Gait Posture. 2009;29:355–359. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2009.01.008.
    1. Peterson CL, Hall AL, Kautz SA, Neptune RR. Pre-swing deficits in forward propulsion, swing initiation and power generation by individual muscles during hemiparetic walking. J Biomech. 2010;43:2348–2355. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2010.04.027.
    1. Farris DJ, Sawicki GS. The mechanics and energetics of human walking and running: a joint level perspective. J R Soc Interface. 2012;9:110–118. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2011.0182.
    1. Neptune RR, Kautz SA, Zajac FE. Contributions of the individual ankle plantar flexors to support, forward progression and swing initiation during walking. J Biomech. 2001;34:1387–1398. doi: 10.1016/S0021-9290(01)00105-1.
    1. Nadeau S, Arsenault AB, Gravel D, Bourbonnais D. Analysis of the clinical factors determining natural and maximal gait speeds in adults with a stroke. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 1999;78:123–130. doi: 10.1097/00002060-199903000-00007.
    1. Chen G, Patten C, Kothari DH, Zajac FE. Gait differences between individuals with post-stroke hemiparesis and non-disabled controls at matched speeds. Gait Posture. 2005;22:51–56. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2004.06.009.
    1. Combs SA, Dugan EL, Ozimek EN, Curtis AB. Effects of body-weight supported treadmill training on kinetic symmetry in persons with chronic stroke. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2012;27:887–892. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2012.06.011.
    1. Duncan PW, Sullivan KJ, Behrman AL, Azen SP, Wu SS, Nadeau SE, et al. Body-weight-supported treadmill rehabilitation after stroke. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:2026–2036. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1010790.
    1. Reisman DS, Wityk R, Silver K, Bastian AJ. Locomotor adaptation on a split-belt treadmill can improve walking symmetry post-stroke. Brain. 2007;130:1861–1872. doi: 10.1093/brain/awm035.
    1. Reisman DS, McLean H, Keller J, Danks KA, Bastian AJ. Repeated split-belt treadmill training improves poststroke step length asymmetry. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2013;27:460–468. doi: 10.1177/1545968312474118.
    1. Lamontagne A, Fung J, McFadyen BJ, Faubert J. Modulation of walking speed by changing optic flow in persons with stroke. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2007;4:22. doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-4-22.
    1. Feasel J, Whitton MC, Kassler L, Brooks FP, Lewek MD. The integrated virtual environment rehabilitation treadmill system. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2011;19:290–297. doi: 10.1109/TNSRE.2011.2120623.
    1. Lewek MD, Feasel J, Wentz E, Brooks FP, Whitton MC. Use of visual and proprioceptive feedback to improve gait speed and spatiotemporal symmetry following chronic stroke: a case series. Phys Ther. 2012;92:748–756. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20110206.
    1. Kawamoto H, Kamibayashi K, Nakata Y, Yamawaki K, Ariyasu R, Sankai Y, et al. Pilot study of locomotion improvement using hybrid assistive limb in chronic stroke patients. BMC Neurol. 2013;13:141. doi: 10.1186/1471-2377-13-141.
    1. Agrawal SK, Banala SK, Fattah A, Sangwan V, Krishnamoorthy V, Scholz JP, et al. Assessment of motion of a swing leg and gait rehabilitation with a gravity balancing exoskeleton. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2007;15:410–420. doi: 10.1109/TNSRE.2007.903930.
    1. Banala SK, Kim SH, Agrawal SK, Scholz JP. Robot assisted gait training with active leg exoskeleton (ALEX) IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2009;17:2–8. doi: 10.1109/TNSRE.2008.2008280.
    1. Hidler J, Nichols D, Pelliccio M, Brady K, Campbell DD, Kahn JH, et al. Multicenter randomized clinical trial evaluating the effectiveness of the Lokomat in subacute stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009;23:5–13. doi: 10.1177/1545968308326632.
    1. Hornby TG, Campbell DD, Kahn JH, Demott T, Moore JL, Roth HR. Enhanced gait-related improvements after therapist- versus robotic-assisted locomotor training in subjects with chronic stroke: a randomized controlled study. Stroke. 2008;39:1786–1792. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.107.504779.
    1. Krishnan C, Ranganathan R, Kantak SS, Dhaher YY, Rymer WZ. Active robotic training improves locomotor function in a stroke survivor. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2012;9:57. doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-9-57.
    1. Awad LN, Reisman DS, Kesar TM, Binder-Macleod SA. Targeting paretic propulsion to improve poststroke walking function: a preliminary study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2014;95:840–848. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2013.12.012.
    1. Kesar TM, Perumal R, Reisman DS, Jancosko A, Rudolph KS, Higginson JS, et al. Functional electrical stimulation of ankle plantarflexor and dorsiflexor muscles: effects on poststroke gait. Stroke. 2009;40:3821–3827. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.109.560375.
    1. Reisman DS, Binder-MacLeod S, Farquhar WB. Changes in metabolic cost of transport following locomotor training poststroke. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2013;20:161–170. doi: 10.1310/tsr2002-161.
    1. Nolan KJ, Yarossi M. Preservation of the first rocker is related to increases in gait speed in individuals with hemiplegia and AFO. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2011;26:655–660. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2011.03.011.
    1. Danielsson A, Sunnerhagen KS. Energy expenditure in stroke subjects walking with a carbon composite ankle foot orthosis. J Rehabil Med. 2004;36:165–168. doi: 10.1080/16501970410025126.
    1. Bregman DJ, Harlaar J, Meskers CG, de Groot V. Spring-like Ankle Foot Orthoses reduce the energy cost of walking by taking over ankle work. Gait Posture. 2012;35:148–153. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2011.08.026.
    1. Ward J, Sugar T, Boehler A, Standeven J, Engsberg J. Stroke survivors' gait adaptations to a powered ankle-foot orthosis. Advanced Robotics. 2011;25:1879–1901. doi: 10.1163/016918611X588907.
    1. Ferris DP, Gordon KE, Sawicki GS, Peethambaran A. An improved powered ankle-foot orthosis using proportional myoelectric control. Gait Posture. 2006;23:425–428. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2005.05.004.
    1. Gordon KE, Ferris DP. Learning to walk with a robotic ankle exoskeleton. J Biomech. 2007;40:2636–2644. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2006.12.006.
    1. Sawicki GS, Ferris DP. Mechanics and energetics of level walking with powered ankle exoskeletons. J Exp Biol. 2008;211:1402–1413. doi: 10.1242/jeb.009241.
    1. Kao PC, Lewis CL, Ferris DP. Invariant ankle moment patterns when walking with and without a robotic ankle exoskeleton. J Biomech. 2010;43:203–209. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2009.09.030.
    1. Malcolm P, Derave W, Galle S, De Clercq D. A simple exoskeleton that assists plantarflexion can reduce the metabolic cost of human walking. PLoS One. 2013;8:e56137. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0056137.
    1. Lamontagne A, Malouin F, Richards CL, Dumas F. Mechanisms of disturbed motor control in ankle weakness during gait after stroke. Gait Posture. 2002;15:244–255. doi: 10.1016/S0966-6362(01)00190-4.
    1. Turns LJ, Neptune RR, Kautz SA. Relationships between muscle activity and anteroposterior ground reaction forces in hemiparetic walking. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;88:1127–1135. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2007.05.027.
    1. Sawicki GS, Lewis CL, Ferris DP. It pays to have a spring in your step. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 2009;37:130–138. doi: 10.1097/JES.0b013e31819c2df6.
    1. Holden JP, Chou G, Stanhope SJ. Changes in knee joint function over a wide range of walking speeds. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 1997;12:375–382. doi: 10.1016/S0268-0033(97)00020-X.
    1. Bowden MG, Balasubramanian CK, Neptune RR, Kautz SA. Anterior-posterior ground reaction forces as a measure of paretic leg contribution in hemiparetic walking. Stroke. 2006;37:872–876. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000204063.75779.8d.
    1. Brockway JM. Derivation of formulae used to calculate energy expenditure in man. Hum Nutr Clin Nutr. 1987;41:463–471.
    1. Griffin TM, Roberts TJ, Kram R. Metabolic cost of generating muscular force in human walking: insights from load-carrying and speed experiments. J Appl Physiol (1985) 2003;95:172–183.
    1. Sawicki GS, Domingo A, Ferris DP. The effects of powered ankle-foot orthoses on joint kinematics and muscle activation during walking in individuals with incomplete spinal cord injury. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2006;3:3. doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-3-3.
    1. Lamontagne A, Malouin F, Richards CL. Contribution of passive stiffness to ankle plantarflexor moment during gait after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2000;81:351–358. doi: 10.1016/S0003-9993(00)90083-2.
    1. Gao F, Zhang LQ. Altered contractile properties of the gastrocnemius muscle poststroke. J Appl Physiol (1985) 2008;105:1802–1808. doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.90930.2008.
    1. Gao F, Grant TH, Roth EJ, Zhang LQ. Changes in passive mechanical properties of the gastrocnemius muscle at the muscle fascicle and joint levels in stroke survivors. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009;90:819–826. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2008.11.004.
    1. Caputo JM, Collins SH. A universal ankle-foot prosthesis emulator for human locomotion experiments. J Biomech Eng. 2014;136:035002. doi: 10.1115/1.4026225.
    1. Collins SH, Jackson RW. Inducing self-selected human engagement in robotic locomotion training. IEEE Int Conf Rehabil Robot. 2013;2013:6650488.
    1. Cain SM, Gordon KE, Ferris DP. Locomotor adaptation to a powered ankle-foot orthosis depends on control method. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2007;4:48. doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-4-48.
    1. Galle S, Malcolm P, Derave W, De Clercq D. Adaptation to walking with an exoskeleton that assists ankle extension. Gait Posture. 2013;38:495–499. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2013.01.029.
    1. Wang J, Kannape OA, Herr HM. Proportional EMG control of ankle plantar flexion in a powered transtibial prosthesis. IEEE Int Conf Rehabil Robot. 2013;2013:6650391.
    1. Huang S, Wensman JP, Ferris DP. An experimental powered lower limb prosthesis using proportional myoelectric control. J. Med. Devices. 2014;8:5. doi: 10.1115/1.4026633.
    1. Marchal-Crespo L, Reinkensmeyer DJ. Review of control strategies for robotic movement training after neurologic injury. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2009;6:20. doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-6-20.
    1. Reinkensmeyer DJ, Emken JL, Cramer SC. Robotics, motor learning, and neurologic recovery. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2004;6:497–525. doi: 10.1146/annurev.bioeng.6.040803.140223.
    1. Jonsdottir J, Cattaneo D, Regola A, Crippa A, Recalcati M, Rabuffetti M, et al. Concepts of motor learning applied to a rehabilitation protocol using biofeedback to improve gait in a chronic stroke patient: an A-B system study with multiple gait analyses. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2007;21:190–194. doi: 10.1177/1545968306290823.
    1. Aiello E, Gates DH, Patritti BL, Cairns KD, Meister M, Clancy EA, et al. Visual EMG Biofeedback to Improve Ankle Function in Hemiparetic Gait. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2005;7:7703–7706.
    1. Franz JR, Maletis M, Kram R. Real-time feedback enhances forward propulsion during walking in old adults. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2014;29:68–74. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2013.10.018.
    1. Winter DA. Energy generation and absorption at the ankle and knee during fast, natural, and slow cadences. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1983;175:147–154.
    1. Lelas JL, Merriman GJ, Riley PO, Kerrigan DC. Predicting peak kinematic and kinetic parameters from gait speed. Gait Posture. 2003;17:106–112. doi: 10.1016/S0966-6362(02)00060-7.
    1. Parvataneni K, Olney SJ, Brouwer B. Changes in muscle group work associated with changes in gait speed of persons with stroke. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2007;22:813–820. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2007.03.006.
    1. Nair PM, Rooney KL, Kautz SA, Behrman AL. Stepping with an ankle foot orthosis re-examined: a mechanical perspective for clinical decision making. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2010;25:618–622. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2010.03.001.
    1. Desloovere K, Molenaers G, Van Gestel L, Huenaerts C, Van Campenhout A, Callewaert B, et al. How can push-off be preserved during use of an ankle foot orthosis in children with hemiplegia? A prospective controlled study. Gait Posture. 2006;24:142–151. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2006.08.003.
    1. Kottink AI, Oostendorp LJ, Buurke JH, Nene AV, Hermens HJ, IJzerman MJ. The orthotic effect of functional electrical stimulation on the improvement of walking in stroke patients with a dropped foot: a systematic review. Artif Organs. 2004;28:577–586. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1594.2004.07310.x.
    1. Little VL, McGuirk TE, Patten C. Impaired limb shortening following stroke: what's in a name? PLoS One. 2014;9:e110140. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0110140.
    1. Gordon KE, Sawicki GS, Ferris DP. Mechanical performance of artificial pneumatic muscles to power an ankle-foot orthosis. J Biomech. 2006;39:1832–1841. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2005.05.018.

Source: PubMed

Подписаться