Characterization of Volitional Electromyographic Signals in the Lower Extremity After Motor Complete Spinal Cord Injury.
Elizabeth Heald, Ronald Hart, Kevin Kilgore and 1 others
PMID 28443786WHAT IT FOUND
People with motor-complete cervical spinal cord injury often produced small intentional electrical signals in lower-leg muscles despite no visible movement.
Signal quality varied, but some signals may be useful for future neuroprosthetic control.
Key findings
01Using visual inspection, 16 of 24 participants had at least one lower-extremity EMG channel ranked 4, and 5 of 24 had a channel ranked 5.
02The automatic algorithm found all 82 channels that visual inspection ranked 4 or 5, plus 61 additional channels.
03No clear trend showed which lower-extremity muscles were most active, though abductor digiti minimi, intrinsic toe extensors, and extensor hallucis longus were least common.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study included 24 participants, all with cervical motor-complete SCI, so the results may not show how much residual activity occurs in thoracic or lumbar injuries. Each participant was tested in a single session with no practice and minimal feedback, so the signals may represent initial, not trained, attempts. Only surface EMG with 8 to 12 electrode pairs per limb was used, so activity from muscles not covered may have been missed. The visual ranking method was subjective, and the automatic algorithm found many additional channels, so the best cutoff for a useful control signal is not established. No joint movement or clinical outcome was measured, so the paper does not show that these signals can be used successfully in treatment. Muscle activity can vary day to day and may be affected by factors such as medication timing.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the electrical signals as proof that the patient can produce functional movement or that training will improve walking. The participants had no visible contraction during attempts, and the study tested signal detection only, not clinical treatment.