PHYS THER
Vol. 79, No. 10, October 1999, pp. 919-930
Speed-Dependent Reductions of Force Output in People With Poststroke Hemiparesis
David A Brown and
Steven A Kautz
DA Brown, PhD, PT, is Assistant Professor, Programs in Physical Therapy, Northwestern University Medical School, 645 N Michigan Ave, Suite 1100, Chicago, IL 60611 (USA) (d-brown1{at}nwu.edu). Address all correspondence to Dr Brown
SA Kautz, PhD, is Biomedical Engineer, The Rehabilitation Research & Development Center, VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, Calif
Submitted October 15, 1998;
Accepted June 15, 1999
 |
Abstract
|
|---|
Background and Purpose. Movement is slow in people with poststroke hemiparesis. Moving at faster speeds is thought by some researchers to exacerbate of abnormal or unwanted muscle activity. The purpose of this study was to quantify the effects of increased speed on motor performance during pedaling exercise in people with poststroke hemiparesis. Subjects. Twelve elderly subjects with no known neurological impairment and 15 subjects with poststroke hemiparesis of greater than 6 months' duration were tested. Methods. Subjects pedaled at 12 randomly ordered workload and cadence combinations (45-, 90-, 135-, and 180-J workloads at 25, 40, and 55 rpm). Pedal reaction forces were used to calculate work done by each lower extremity. Electromyographic activity was recorded from 7 lower-extremity muscles. Results. The main finding was that net mechanical work done by the paretic lower extremity decreased as speed increased in all subjects. The occurrence of inappropriate muscle activity on the paretic side, however, was not exacerbated in that the vastus medialis muscle on the paretic side did not show a consistent further increase in its prolonged activity at higher speeds. The mechanics of faster pedaling resulted in greater net negative mechanical work because, at higher pedaling rates, the prolonged vastus medialis muscle activity is present during a greater portion of the cycle. Conclusion and Discussion. The lessened force output by the paretic limb is mainly the result of the inherent mechanical demands of higher-speed pedaling and not due to exacerbation of impaired neural control.
Key Words: Exercise • Hemiparesis • Motor activity • Muscle spasticity
|
Introduction
|
|---|
Decreased speed of locomotion is one of the major characteristics that occur as a result of poststroke hemiparesis.1–4 Walking speed is an effective indicator of the degree of abnormality in gait quality, overall functional status, and clinical progress in people with hemiparesis.5,6 Furthermore, gait speed has been found to correlate with ability to balance on either one or both lower extremities, degree of lower-extremity force recovery, Barthel Index score, degree of ambulatory independence, cadence of gait, and rating of overall gait appearance.7–9
Increased speed is thought by some authors to result in further exacerbation of unwanted or abnormal muscle activity; therefore, people with hemiparesis are advised to avoid moving at faster speeds.10 This hypothesis stems from studies that demonstrate that speed-dependent stretch reflexes in antagonist muscle groups contribute to the inability to increase movement speed and that increased effort results in greater-than-normal muscle activity that will interfere with movement.11–13 When a person moves slowly over a long period of time, this contributes to a further loss of ability to generate powerful contractions and maintain endurance at fast speeds because of muscle atrophy and increased muscle fatigability (see McComas14 for a review). In individuals who have not had strokes, training is known to improve muscle force and endurance at the training speed as well as at slower speeds, although improvements during training at slower speeds do not carry over to training at faster speeds (see McArdle et al15 for a review). Therefore, the very interventions aimed at improving power at faster walking speeds in people who have not had strokes are thought to be contraindicated in people with hemiparesis because of the exacerbation of unwanted or abnormal muscle activity during movement.
Although these previous studies have focused on reflexes and their contributions to slow movement speeds, it is increasingly recognized that the mechanics of a given movement change as the speed of the movement increases16 and thus task mechanics may be another contributor to differences in movement ability at faster speeds. In the example of cycling, previous studies17–19 have shown that increased pedaling speeds required earlier onsets of muscle activity to reach peak force at appropriate points in the cycle. In addition, at faster speeds, speed-dependent interaction forces (eg, inertial forces such as Coriolis forces) increased in magnitude.16 Given these mechanical alterations at higher speeds, we believe the nervous system must develop strategies to deal with altered task mechanics.
Pedaling allows exploration of the role of task mechanics (ie, mechanical constraints present during a task) during locomotion at different speeds. It is possible to study a wide range of speeds because the nonparetic lower extremity can assist the progression of the crank, via the coupled crank spindle, and therefore overcome impaired control of the paretic lower extremity. Such studies are important because we believe that observations can be made about the behavior of the paretic limb during fast movements, and we can determine whether that behavior is assistive or resistive to the forward progression of the crank. In addition, mechanical measures of pedaling performance have been used to characterize impairments in people with hemiparesis.20–23 These studies have shown that the mechanics of pedaling are impaired so that, compared with normal pedaling behavior (ie, force generation and muscle activity during a pedaling task), a reduced amount of net mechanical work is done by the paretic lower extremity. This reduced work is a result of a combination of reduced positive work done during the downstroke of the cycle and an exaggerated amount of negative work done during the upstroke.20 The timing of electromyographic (EMG) activity in individual paretic limb muscles exhibited 2 distinct types of abnormalities that were correlated with this lesser work production: prolonged excitation in the vastus medialis muscle (VM) and phase-advanced excitation (both early initiation and early termination) in the rectus femoris muscle (RF) and the semimembranosus muscle (SM).20
The purpose of our study was to quantify the effects of increased speed on motor performance during pedaling exercises in people with poststroke hemiparesis. If pedaling at higher speeds results in less work done by the paretic limb, then we believe at least 3 possible mechanisms may contribute to the effect. One mechanism—increased inappropriate activity—would involve the exacerbation of EMG timing abnormalities so that greater prolonged activity (eg, in VM) may occur. A second possible mechanism would involve a lack of speed-appropriate EMG timing alterations so that peak force generation would be delayed. In the case of pedaling, an inability to generate earlier onset of muscle activity at faster speeds will result in peak pedal forces being generated at later, less appropriate regions of the crank cycle. Third, it might also be possible that EMG timing changes in people with poststroke hemiparesis parallel those of individuals who have not had strokes, but are superimposed on the existing pathological timing of muscle activity. For example, even if the pathologically prolonged VM were to turn off (deactivate) at the same "late" point in the crank cycle, the residual negative work that would be generated by the deactivating muscle would be greater at faster speeds.
If inappropriate muscle activity is increased with speed, then these faster speeds should be avoided during exercise. If speed-dependent reductions in paretic work are the result of the already-present pathological timings at slower speeds, however, then we contend that rehabilitation efforts should be focused on correcting the original timing abnormality to enable appropriate speed-dependent mechanisms to produce functional adaptations.
|
Method
|
|---|
Subjects
This study was a subset of a larger study to investigate the pathological mechanisms associated with pedaling and the effects of workload on pedaling behavior, and the methods have been described in detail elsewhere.20 Twelve elderly subjects (7 male, 5 female) without known neurological impairments and 15 subjects (12 male, 3 female) with poststroke hemiparesis of greater than 6 months' duration (mean poststroke period=42.3 months, SD=43.1, range=7–132) were tested (Table). The subjects without hemiparesis had a mean age of 69.5 years (SD=8.4, range=65–82), and the subjects with hemiparesis had a mean age of 65.3 years (SD=5.3, range=57–77). Ten subjects had left-sided hemiparesis, and 5 subjects had right-sided hemiparesis. All of these subjects had sustained a single, unilateral cerebrovascular accident with residual lower-limb paresis; had no observable perceptual, cognitive, or sensory deficits; exhibited no evidence of lower-limb contracture; had no history of cardiovascular impairments that would make pedaling contraindicated; and could tolerate sitting on a bicycle seat for approximately 1 hour. All subjects gave informed consent prior to participation in the study.
Procedure
All subjects with hemiparesis underwent the lower-limb portion of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment,24 a reliable and valid measure of motor recovery poststroke,25 for assessment of global motor function. The Fugl-Meyer Assessment allowed us to identify 3 subjects who were unable to move their paretic lower limb out of mass flexor or extensor synergy, 6 subjects who were able to move their paretic lower limb with combined flexor and extensor synergy only, and 6 subjects who were able to generate isolated movements outside of mass synergy patterns. The subjects with hemiparesis ranged in walking ability from mildly impaired to nonambulatory. The subjects without hemiparesis showed no signs or symptoms of neurological disease or lower-limb orthopedic impairment.
We modified a standard ergometer with a frictionally loaded flywheel by including a backboard seating mechanism with shoulder and lap harnesses to stabilize the subject and remove the need to control balance26 (Fig. 1). The subject sat on a standard cushioned bicycle seat while leaning, with an upright trunk posture, against the backboard. This posture allowed a subject with hemiparesis to pedal without the need to hold on to handlebars and, we believe, provided greater trunk stability. Reaction forces oriented normal and fore-aft to the pedal surfaces were measured by instrumented pedals with well-documented measurement reliability.27 Reliability of the linear response to loads has been documented at r =.99. Accuracy checks confirmed the dynanometer's ability to measure forces with an absolute error of ±5 N. Other tests demonstrated both mechanical and electrical decoupling between the normal and shear forces and a relatively flat dynamic response to sudden impacts. The subject's feet were firmly attached to footplates on the pedal surface, which allowed the subject to create shear and vertical forces. Angular rotation of the crank and pedals were measured by optical encoders that were fixed to the centers of rotation of the crank and pedals.
View larger version (24K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 1. Cycle ergometer used in this study, including the definition of the quadrant regions of the crank cycle that were used to quantify electromyographic activity. The contiguous quadrants I and II represent limb extension, and quadrants III and IV represent limb flexion.
|
|
The experimental protocol, conducted in an hour, consisted of measurement of pedal forces, pedal and crank kinematics, and EMG activity during pedaling at 12 randomly ordered workload and cadence combinations (workloads: 45 J="very low," 90 J="low," 135 J="medium," and 180 J="high"; speeds: 25 rpm="slow," 40 rpm="medium," and 55 rpm="fast"). The crank angular speed was displayed for the subjects, and they were instructed to maintain a steady cadence while pedaling. Once a steady cadence was achieved, 15 seconds of EMG, pedal force, and encoder data were collected (1,200 samples per second).
Surface EMG data were recorded from the RF, VM, SM, and biceps femoris (BF) muscles of the right lower extremity of the control subjects and from the same muscles of both lower extremities of the subjects with hemiparesis. Silver-silver chloride EMG eletrodes* were positioned over the distal half of the muscle belly such that contact surfaces were aligned longitudinally to the muscle fibers. Electrode sites were prepared by cleaning the skin with isopropyl alcohol and shaving the hair, when necessary, to ensure good contact.
Data Processing and Analysis
The net mechanical work done by each limb was calculated from the kinematic and kinetic data and used as a measure of motor performance. First, a third-order Butterworth low-pass filter was used to filter pedal forces (20-Hz cutoff) and the crank and pedal angles (8-Hz cutoff). Filtering was used to eliminate background noise due to movement artifact. The pedal force components oriented parallel and tangential to the crank arm were calculated from the normal and shear forces. The tangential component of the pedal force created a torque about the crank center (referred to as the "crank torque"), which is the only component that contributed to the angular acceleration or deceleration of the crank. Crank torque was plotted against crank angle, and calculating the area under the resulting curve yielded the net mechanical work done by the lower extremity. The positive and negative areas were also computed separately as measures of the positive (propulsive) and negative (retarding) work done by the limb.
Because muscle excitation cannot be consistently characterized by a single set of on-off times in many people with hemiparesis, each EMG measurement was quantified in terms of the percentage of activity present in 4 equal quadrants (90°) of the pedaling cycle relative to the entire activity over the crank cycle (Fig. 1). The four quadrants were defined by axes parallel and perpendicular to the seat tube. Quadrants I and II coincided with limb extension (foot moving away from pelvis), and quadrants III and IV coincided with limb flexion. For each quadrant, the excitation, quantified by integrating the rectified EMG (IEMG), was expressed as the percentage of IEMG over the entire cycle. The relative IEMG in a quadrant provided a measure to quantitatively test whether the paretic limb's EMG offset was inappropriately prolonged (eg, quadrant III for the VM) or appropriately earlier in onset at higher speeds (eg, quadrant IV for the VM and RF, quadrant I for the BF and SM). Using this analysis method, we were able to calculate any undue speed-dependent increases in prolonged muscle activity in the spastic VM and any appropriate speed-dependent earlier activity in the VM, RF, SM, and BF.
We visually examined individual, nonaveraged crank kinematics, kinetics, and EMG activity for general trends. We then calculated the total positive, total negative, and net mechanical work and percentage of IEMG activity in each quadrant for each revolution and averaged the data to obtain the mean values for the paretic limb in each trial. These mean values represented a consistent work and EMG output from each subject at any given workload and speed condition. Within subjects, the within-trial variability of work measurements had intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC[1,1]) between .91 and .93 for net total, positive, and negative work values. The within-trial variability of EMG quadrant measurements had ICC(1,1) values of .72 for the SM, .87 for the VM, .88 for the RF, and .91 for the BF.
To establish the relationship between dependent variables (ie, net mechanical, positive, and negative work and percentage of quadrant EMG activity) and pedaling speed, the best-fit linear regression was calculated. Due to the large intersubject variability among subjects with hemiparesis, the individual subject data are also presented wherever possible to demonstrate the robustness of findings within this group. These data show that statistical findings are supported by the data from a vast majority of the subjects.
|
Results
|
|---|
Because many workload and speed combinations were performed either faster or slower than the target speeds, trials were recategorized at 1 of 7 speed levels that fell within ±3 rpm of a specified speed category measure (level 1: 23.0–29.0 rpm, level 2: 29.1–35.0 rpm, level 3: 35.1–41.0 rpm, level 4: 41.1–47.0 rpm, level 5: 47.1–53.0 rpm, level 6: 53.1–59.0 rpm, and level 7: 59.1–65.0 rpm) (Fig. 2). This recategorization allowed analysis of all successful pedaling trials at the actual attained speeds and provided a finer gradation of speed categories. The criterion for a successful pedaling trial was the ability to pedal the crank for 30 seconds without stopping.
View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 2. Frequency distribution of speeds attained by subjects without hemiparesis (open bars) and subjects with hemiparesis (darkened bars). Each level represents a 6-rpm region of speeds, as follows: level 1: 23.0 –29.0 rpm, level 2: 29.1–35.0 rpm, level 3: 35.1–41.0 rpm, level 4: 41.1–47.0 rpm, level 5: 47.1–53.0 rpm, level 6: 53.1–59.0 rpm, and level 7: 59.1–65.0 rpm.
|
|
Kinetic Responses to Increased Speed
Subjects without neurological impairments demonstrated typical kinetic responses to increased speed in that the crank torque profiles remained relatively unchanged (Fig. 3). When workload was normalized as a percentage of total work done by both lower extremities, these subjects showed no changes in net mechanical work done by each lower extremity (P >.05) (Fig. 4A). On average, however, the subjects with hemiparesis showed decreased net mechanical work done by the paretic lower extremity as speed increased (r2=.89, P<.001) (Fig. 4A). All 15 subjects showed declining values of net total work as speed increased (Fig. 4B). Although less overall work was done by the paretic lower extremity, the nonparetic lower extremity was capable of generating greater positive work at higher speeds because the coupled cranks allowed it to compensate for reduced work in the paretic lower extremity. Therefore, pedaling at higher speeds resulted in reduced force output by the paretic limb.
View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 3. Averaged crank force versus crank angle at 2 different pedaling speeds (25 and 55 rpm) for a lower extremity of a representative subject without hemiparesis (A) and for the paretic lower extremity of a representative subject with hemiparesis (B). There is consistency of the peak-peak amplitude for the force profile of the subject without hemiparesis at the 2 speeds, whereas the force profile of the subject with hemiparesis shows a large increase in negative (resistive) torque at the faster speed during the upstroke phase of pedaling.
|
|
View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 4. Net total work done during the crank cycle plotted against the 7 speed intervals. This is the net value of resistive and assistive torque that contributes to the forward progression of the crank. (A) Net total work done averaged across all subjects (control lower extremity [LE] of subjects without hemiparesis and paretic LE of subjects with hemiparesis), with standard error bars. There is stability of the measure over all speeds in the subjects without hemiparesis, whereas the measure decreases over the range of increasing speeds in the subjects with hemiparesis. (B) Net total work done by paretic LE for each subject with hemiparesis. Lines represent best linear fit to the data over the range of speeds attained (shorter lines represent shorter range of speeds attained). All lines have negative slopes, indicating that every subject shows a reduction of net total work done as speed increases. See Fig. 2 legend for explanation of speed levels.
|
|
As previously reported with these data, the performance deficit in people with hemiparesis can be characterized as reduced force output during the downstroke phase and increased resistive force output during the upstroke phase.20–22 At faster pedaling speeds, the decrease in total work done by the paretic lower extremity was primarily accounted for by increases in the resistive component (Fig. 5). The net negative work done by the paretic lower extremity occurred during the upstroke phase of the pedaling cycle and resulted in greater resistance to forward crank acceleration (Fig. 3). Although there was no linear relationship between net negative work and speed in the subjects without hemiparesis (P >.05), the subjects with hemiparesis, on average, showed a linear increase in net negative work by the paretic limb (r2=.92, P<.001) (Fig. 5A). This average trend is supported by the individual trends in 12 subjects with hemiparesis who showed increased net negative work at higher speeds (Fig. 5B). Net positive work (ie, downstroke force) did not decrease in the paretic limb. Therefore, the reduced force output that resulted from higher speeds was primarily due to the greater amount of resistive torque generated during the upstroke phase of pedaling.
View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 5. Net negative (resistive) work done during the crank cycle plotted against the 7 speed intervals. (A) Net negative work done averaged across all subjects (control lower extremity [LE] of subjects without hemiparesis and paretic LE of subjects with hemiparesis), with standard error bars. Thereis stability of the measure over all speeds in the subjects without hemiparesis, whereas the measure increases over the range of increasing speeds in the subjects with hemiparesis. (B) Net negative work done by paretic LE for each subject with hemiparesis. Lines represent best linear fit to the data over the range of speeds attained (shorter lines represent shorter range of speeds attained). All except 3 lines (dotted) have positive slopes, indicating that the majority of subjects with hemiparesis (n=12) showed an increase of net negative work done (more resistive torque) as speed increased. See Fig. 2 legend for explanation of speed levels.
|
|
Muscle Activation Responses to Increased Speed
On average, subjects with hemiparesis did not show increased percentages of prolonged VM activity at faster speeds of pedaling (P >.05) (Fig. 6). Seven subjects with hemiparesis showed a trend for increasing percentages of inappropriate activity at higher speeds (Fig. 6). Only 3 of the 7 subjects with increased inappropriate VM activity, however, showed a gain of over 5% from the lowest speed to the fastest speed attained. Therefore, more prolonged VM activity is unlikely to be the main factor in explaining the consistent increase in negative work done by the paretic limb at higher speeds in all subjects.
View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 6. Percentage of inappropriately prolonged vastus medialis muscle (VM) activity (quadrant III), with the paretic lower extremity for each subject with hemiparesis plotted against the 7 speed levels. Eight of the 15 subjects with hemiparesis show a downward trend in prolonged activity, indicating a reduction in the amount of inappropriate activity at faster speeds. See Fig. 2 legend for explanation of speed levels.
|
|
The effect of equal percentages of inappropriate VM activity generated over shorter cycle times (as happens at faster speeds) appeared to result in less total work done by the paretic lower extremity. When normalized by cycle time, an inappropriate percentage of VM activity was shown to be strongly correlated to net total work done by the paretic lower extremity (r2=.85, P<.0001) (Fig. 7). Therefore, because inappropriate VM activity is strongly correlated with reduced total work20 and because negative work was done by the VM over a greater portion of the cycle at faster speeds, shorter cycle times resulted in greater net negative work (and, therefore, less net total work) done during the upstroke.
View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 7. Negative correlation of vastus medialis muscle (VM) activity during quadrant III normalized by absolute time (rather than crank angle) and the corresponding net total work done by the paretic lower extremity (LE). This relationship indicates that when similar levels of inappropriate activity occur over a shorter time period (ie, at faster speeds), then less total net work is done by the paretic LE. One hundred thirty-two values presented (48 missing values from trials where the subject could not pedal against a given workload level). %VM3/s=percentage of vastus medialis muscle activity in quadrant III per second.
|
|
Because subjects without neurological impairments have shown progressively earlier onsets of muscle activity and relatively equal offsets of muscle activity with faster speeds,17–19 we were interested in determining whether subjects with hemiparesis demonstrated the same control strategy. To do this, we measured the percentage of activity present during the quadrant of onset of muscle activity and during the quadrant of offset of muscle activity. The onset of muscle activity occurred during the first 90 degrees of the upstroke (quadrant III) with the RF, occurred during the last 90 degrees of the upstroke (quadrant IV) with the VM, and during the initial 90 degrees of the downstroke (quadrant I) with the SM. When EMG profiles from all subjects without hemiparesis were averaged, muscle activity was observed to advance on the order of 20 degrees in the crank cycle for all 3 muscles (Figs. 8B, 9B, and 10B). Similar effects were observed in the SM, RF, and VM in individuals with hemiparesis (Figs. 8C, 9C, and 10C). On average, subjects with hemiparesis had linear trends indicating increasing percentages of activity in the quadrant of onset for the VM and SM, but not for the RF (VM: r2=.89, P<.001; SM: r2=.851, P<.001; RF: P>.05). Fourteen subjects with hemiparesis showed linearly increasing trends in the VM (Fig. 8A), 10 subjects with hemiparesis showed linearly increasing trends in the RF (Fig. 9A), and 13 subjects with hemiparesis showed linearly increasing trends in the SM (Fig. 10A). With the offset of muscle activity, however, the RF, VM, and SM activity remained relatively unchanged (P >.05 for each muscle). Therefore, individuals with hemiparesis exhibit (as do individuals without hemiparesis) earlier onsets of muscle activity in the VM and SM and constant offsets in the VM, RF, and SM when pedaling at faster speeds.
View larger version (23K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 8. Composite figures of vastus medialis muscle (VM) activity while pedaling at different speeds. (A) Individual linear trends of earlier onset of activity across all speeds from subjects with hemiparesis. Solid lines (14/15 subjects) indicate greater percentage of activity occurring during the onset phase. (B) Averaged electromyographic (EMG) activity profiles across all subjects without hemiparesis at 2 different speed intervals (23–29 and 41–47 rpm). White arrow illustrates earlier onset of activity at faster speed (dotted line) when compared with slower speed (black arrow and solid line). (C) Similar response seen for a representative subject with hemiparesis who demonstrated inappropriate prolonged VM activity (averaged across multiple cycles at each speed). Onset of EMG activity (white arrow) for the faster speed interval (dotted line) is earlier in the crank cycle when compared with the slower speed profile (dark arrow and solid line). These observations are confirmed through quantitative analysis of the percentage of EMG activity occurring during the quadrants of "onset" and "offset." See Fig. 2 legend for explanation of speed levels.
|
|
View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 9. Composite figures of rectus femoris muscle (RF) activity while pedaling at different speeds. (A) Individual linear trends of earlier onset of activity across all speeds from subjects with hemiparesis. Solid lines (10/15 subjects) indicate greater percentage of activity occurring during the onset phase. (B) Averaged electromyographic (EMG) activity profiles across all subjects without hemiparesis at 2 different speed intervals (23–29 and 41–47 rpm). White arrow illustrates earlier onset of activity at faster speed (dotted line) when compared with slower speed (black arrow and solid line). (C) Similar response is seen for a representative subject with hemiparesis who demonstrated phase-advanced (relative to control activity) RF activity (averaged across multiple cycles at each speed). Onset of EMG activity (white arrow) for the faster speed interval (dotted line) is earlier in the crank cycle when compared with the slower speed profile (dark arrow and solid line). These observations are confirmed through quantitative analysis of the percentage of EMG activity occurring during the quadrants of "onset" and "offset." See Fig. 2 legend for explanation of speed levels.
|
|
View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 10. Composite figures of semimembranosus muscle (SM) activity while pedaling at different speeds. (A) Individual linear trends of earlier onset of activity across all speeds from subjects with hemiparesis. Solid lines (13/15 subjects) indicate greater percentage of activity occurring during the onset phase. (B) Averaged electromyographic (EMG) activity profiles across all subjects without hemiparesis at 2 different speed intervals (23–29 and 41–47 rpm). White arrow illustrates earlier onset of activity at faster speed (dotted line) when compared with slower speed (black arrow and solid line). (C) Similar response seen for a representative subject with hemiparesis who demonstrated phase-advanced (relative to control activity) SM activity (averaged across multiple cycles at each speed). Onset of EMG activity (white arrow) for the faster speed interval (dotted line) is earlier in the crank cycle when compared with the slower speed profile (dark arrow and solid line). These observations are confirmed through quantitative analysis of the percentage of EMG activity occurring during the quadrants of "onset" and "offset." See Fig. 2 legend for explanation of speed levels.
|
|
|
Discussion and Conclusion
|
|---|
The main finding from our study was that the already reduced force output of the paretic lower extremity was further reduced at higher speeds of pedaling. Reductions occurred mostly because of increased negative work done during the upstroke phase in the pedaling cycle. That is, greater resistive torque was generated at faster speeds. This reduction in pedal force output was consistent among all subjects with hemiparesis, regardless of the initial level of force output in the paretic lower extremity. The nonparetic limb was able to compensate for this decrement in pedal force by increasing its force output, and we therefore were able to observe the behavior of the paretic lower extremity despite its resistive torque increasing during faster speed pedaling.
Even though the force output of the paretic lower extremity was reduced at faster pedaling speeds, there was little indication of exacerbation of inappropriate muscle activity. Despite the fact that the agonist burst was prolonged, we observed that the duration of the burst in absolute time was actually lessened at faster speeds because the offset of muscle activity in the VM, RF, and SM occurred at similar points in the crank cycle at progressively faster speeds. Other researchers12,13,28,29 have attempted to show a strong relationship between speed-dependent hyperactive stretch reflex activity and speed-dependent exacerbation of movement dysfunction in people with hemiparesis. Therefore, because our results did not show an increased amount of EMG activity at progressively faster speeds during the prolonged activation in the VM, a speed-dependent reflex effect could not be identified. In addition, Sahrmann and Norton30 demonstrated that prolonged activation, not necessarily due to hyperactive stretch reflexes, was a major determinant of movement speed and could result in slowing of movement, especially during reversal of movement. Other studies that have quantified what is often called "spasticity" during both walking and pedaling have focused on the abnormal timing of muscle activity rather than the occurrence of triggered stretch reflex responses.23,31 The results of our study and other reports20–22 appear to support the finding that mistiming of muscle activity rather than stretch-induced abnormal muscle activity is responsible for producing counterproductive decelerating forces in the limbs during cyclical locomotive tasks.
Our results also demonstrate an intact strategy for generating pedal forces at faster pedaling speeds.17–19 Subjects without neurological impairments were shown to generate (in this study and in previous studies17–19) EMG activity earlier in the cycle, supposedly to produce peak level of forces during equivalent regions of the crank cycle. We believe this strategy is used to compensate for the decreased time available to reach peak force. A similar strategy was observed in the majority of subjects with hemiparesis in our study, even though their timing of EMG activity was impaired at slower speeds.
Even though the abnormally prolonged activity in the VM was not increased at higher speeds, unchanged prolonged activity may still contribute to greater negative work because the force production during deactivation of the VM will affect a greater portion of the cycle when the crank moves at a faster speed. Therefore, the occurrence of prolonged activity that is present with paretic muscle at slower speeds will generate lessened force output simply because of the greater mechanical demands associated with faster pedaling speeds.
Because inappropriate muscle activity did not appear to increase at faster speeds, and for the reasons outlined, we hypothesize that the mechanical demands of faster pedaling speeds were the major contributing factor to the reduction in force output that occurred at faster pedaling speeds. This hypothesis implies that there is no harm to the nervous system when training individuals with spasticity to pedal at faster speeds. This result parallels an earlier published report that increased work-loads also do not exacerbate inappropriate muscle activity during pedaling.21 Together, these 2 studies suggest that regimens of pedaling at faster speeds or high workload might allow the nervous system to further adapt to higher speeds of movement and higher work-loads so that functional improvements may occur.
Finally, physiological benefits have been ascribed to aerobic ergometer exercise.32 Therefore, utilizing higher-speed pedaling to reach target heart rates need not be avoided due to fear of exacerbating inappropriate muscle activity. Appropriate screening and monitoring of vital cardiovascular and respiratory signs in people with cerebrovascular disease, in our view, are essential to assure safety.
The interpretation of the results from our study is limited by several issues. First, it may not be valid to compare the behavior of the hemiparetic nervous system during pedaling with behavior during other lower-limb tasks such as walking or rising from a sitting position to a standing position. Perhaps the security supplied by the pedaling paradigm prevents protective mechanisms, typically applied during functional tasks, from being applied during movement. These protective mechanisms, stimulated at faster speeds, may exacerbate already impaired motor patterns during a less-secure task such as unsupported walking. Furthermore, by specifying target speeds for the subjects in our study, we were unable to determine the fastest speeds at which they can move. It is possible that at least some of these subjects were pedaling at relatively slow speeds compared with their maximum capability, whereas other subjects may have reached their maximum capability with the slower targeted speeds. That is, the relative effort applied by each subject at the given target speeds was probably highly variable. Finally, caution must be used when applying the results of this study, which was conducted over short bouts of pedaling exercise (less than 1 minute), with longer bouts of exercise that are typically applied in the clinic. It is possible that, over time, the ability to control paretic muscles at faster speeds may degrade with fatigue or heightened sensitivity to stretch. We recommend that similarly designed studies be applied to different movement paradigms, at a full spectrum of speeds and over longer exercise durations.
|
Footnotes
|
|---|
Concept and research design, writing, data collection and analysis, project management, fund procurement, subjects, facilities/equipment, institutional liaisons, clerical/secretarial support, and consultation (including review of manuscript prior to submission) were provided by Brown and Kautz. Christine Dairaghi provided technical assistance with data collection and provision of subjects.
This study was approved by the Stanford University School of Medicine Institutional Review Board.
This work was funded, in part, by the Foundation for Physical Therapy and the Department of Veterans Affairs, Rehabilitation Research and Development Division.
* Therapeutics Unlimited, 2835 Friendship St, Iowa City, IA 52240. 
|
References
|
|---|
- Perry J. The mechanics of walking in hemiplegia.
Clin Orthop.1969; 63:23–31.[Medline]
- Wagenaar RC, Beek WJ. Hemiplegic gait: a kinematic analysis using walking speed as a basis.
J Biomech.1992; 25:1007–1015.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Brandstater ME, de Bruin H, Gowland C, Clark BM. Hemiplegic gait: analysis of temporal variables.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil.1983; 64:583–587.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Perry J, Garrett M, Gronley JK, Mulroy SJ. Classification of walking handicap in the stroke population.
Stroke.1995; 26:982–989.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Dettmann MA, Linder MT, Sepic SB. Relationships among walking performance, postural stability, and functional assessments of the hemiplegic patient.
Am J Phys Med.1987; 66:77–90.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Knutsson E, Richards C. Different types of disturbed motor control in gait of hemiparetic patients.
Brain.1979; 102(pt 2):405–430.
- Bohannon RW, Walsh S. Nature, reliability, and predictive value of muscle performance measures in patients with hemiparesis following stroke.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil.1992; 73:721–725.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Bohannon RW, Andrews AW. Correlation of knee extensor muscle torque and spasticity with gait speed in patients with stroke.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil.1990; 71:330–333.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Roth E, Merbitz C, Mroczek K, et al. Hemiplegic gait: relationships between walking speed and other temporal parameters.
Am J Phys Med Rehabil.1997; 76:128–133.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Bobath B.
Adult Hemiplegia: Evaluation and Treatment. 2nd ed. London, England: William Heinemann Medical Books Ltd;1978
.
- Dimitrijevic MR, Nathan PW. Studies of spasticity in man, I: some features of spasticity.
Brain.1967; 90:1–30.[Free Full Text]
- Corcos DM, Gottlieb GL, Penn RD, et al. Movement deficits caused by hyperexcitable stretch reflexes in spastic humans.
Brain.1986; 109:1043–1058.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Knutsson E, Martensson A, Gransberg L. Influences of muscle stretch reflexes on voluntary, velocity-controlled movements in spastic paraparesis.
Brain.1997; 120(pt 9):1621–1633.
- McComas AJ.
Skeletal Muscle: Form and Function. Champaign, Ill: Human Kinetics Inc;1996
:287–298.
- McArdle WD, Katch FI, Katch VL.
Exercise Physiology. 4th ed. Baltimore, Md: Williams & Wilkins;1996
:393–415.
- Kautz SA, Hull ML. A theoretical basis for interpreting the force applied to the pedal in cycling.
J Biomech.1993; 26:155–165.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Suzuki S, Watanabe S, Homma S. EMG activity and kinematics of human cycling movements at different constant velocities.
Brain Res.1982; 240:245–258.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Neptune RR, Kautz SA, Hull ML. The effect of pedaling rate on coordination in cycling.
J Biomech.1997; 30:1051–1058.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Marsh AP, Martin PE. The relationship between cadence and lower extremity EMG in cyclists and noncyclists.
Med Sci Sports Exerc.1995; 27:217–225.
- Kautz SA, Brown DA. Relationships between timing of muscle excitation and impaired motor performance during cyclical lower extremity movement in post-stroke hemiplegia.
Brain.1998; 121 (pt 3):515–526.
- Brown DA, Kautz SA. Increased workload enhances force output during pedaling exercise in persons with poststroke hemiplegia.
Stroke.1998; 29:598–606.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Brown DA, Kautz SA, Dairaghi CA. Muscle activity adapts to anti-gravity posture during pedalling in persons with post-stroke hemiplegia.
Brain.1997; 120(pt 5):825–837.
- Benecke R, Conrad B, Meinck HM, Hohne J. Electromyographic analysis of bicycling on an ergometer for evaluation of spasticity of lower limbs in man. In: Desmedt JE, ed.
Motor Control Mechanisms in Health and Disease. New York, NY: Raven Press;1983
:1035–1046.
- Fugl-Meyer AR, Jaasko L, Leyman I, et al. The post-stroke hemiplegic patient, I: a method of evaluation of physical performance.
Scand J Rehabil Med.1975; 7:13–31.[Medline]
- Duncan PW, Propst M, Nelson SG. Reliability of the Fugl-Meyer assessment of sensorimotor following cerebrovascular accident.
Phys Ther.1983; 63:1606–1610.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Brown DA, Kautz SA, Dairaghi CA. Muscle activity patterns altered during pedaling at different body orientations.
J Biomech.1996; 29:1349–1356.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Newmiller J, Hull ML, Zajac FE. A mechanically decoupled two force component bicycle pedal dynanometer.
J Biomech.1988; 21:375–386.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Nathan PW. Factors affecting spasticity.
Int Rehabil Med.1980; 2:27–30.[Medline]
- Phillips CA, Repperger DW, Chelette TL. The acceleration-velocity relationship: identification of normal and spastic upper extremity movement.
Comput Biol Med.1997; 27:309–328.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Sahrmann SA, Norton BJ. The relationship of voluntary movement to spasticity in the upper motor neuron syndrome.
Ann Neurol.1977; 2:460–465.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Fung J, Barbeau H. A dynamic EMG profile index to quantify muscular activation disorder in spastic paretic gait.
Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol.1989; 73:233–244.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Potempa K, Lopez M, Braun LT, et al. Physiological outcomes of aerobic exercise training in hemiparetic stroke patients.
Stroke.1995; 26:101–105.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
P. L Scheets, S. A Sahrmann, and B. J Norton
Use of Movement System Diagnoses in the Management of Patients With Neuromuscular Conditions: A Multiple-Patient Case Report
Physical Therapy,
June 1, 2007;
87(6):
654 - 669.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. G. Bowden, C. K. Balasubramanian, R. R. Neptune, and S. A. Kautz
Anterior-Posterior Ground Reaction Forces as a Measure of Paretic Leg Contribution in Hemiparetic Walking
Stroke,
March 1, 2006;
37(3):
872 - 876.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. A. Kautz, P. W. Duncan, S. Perera, R. R. Neptune, and S. A. Studenski
Coordination of Hemiparetic Locomotion after Stroke Rehabilitation
Neurorehabil Neural Repair,
September 1, 2005;
19(3):
250 - 258.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. A Brown, S. Nagpal, and S. Chi
Limb-Loaded Cycling Program for Locomotor Intervention Following Stroke
Physical Therapy,
February 1, 2005;
85(2):
159 - 168.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Schindler-Ivens, D. A. Brown, and J. D. Brooke
Direction-Dependent Phasing of Locomotor Muscle Activity Is Altered Post-Stroke
J Neurophysiol,
October 1, 2004;
92(4):
2207 - 2216.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
Copyright © 1999 by the American Physical Therapy Association.
Top
Introduction
Method
