Leg Muscle Activity During Walking With Assistive Devices at Varying

21 downloads 0 Views 166KB Size Report
vastus lateralis muscles on a test leg during assisted axillary .... Fig 1. (A) The ED Walker is a newly designed assisted walking device that allows for weight ...
1555

PROSTHETICS/ORTHOTICS/DEVICES

Leg Muscle Activity During Walking With Assistive Devices at Varying Levels of Weight Bearing Brian C. Clark, MS, Todd M. Manini, MS, Nathaniel R. Ordway, MS, Lori L. Ploutz-Snyder, PhD ABSTRACT. Clark BC, Manini TM, Ordway NR, PloutzSnyder LL. Leg muscle activity during walking with assistive devices at varying levels of weight bearing. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2004;85:1555-60. Objective: To evaluate the muscle activation patterns at varying levels of weight-bearing forces during assisted walking with an axillary crutch and a recently designed device that allows weight transfer through the pelvic girdle (ED Walker). Design: Descriptive, repeated measures. Setting: University-based research laboratory. Participants: Twelve healthy volunteers (age, 39.6⫾13.6y). Interventions: Not applicable. Main Outcome Measures: Electromyographic activity was recorded from the anterior tibialis, soleus, biceps femoris, and vastus lateralis muscles on a test leg during assisted axillary crutch and ED Walker ambulation. Force platform readings measured weight-bearing load (non, light, heavy). These values were normalized to normal walking gait. Results: In the vastus lateralis and soleus muscles, both devices allowed for approximately 50% and 65% reductions in electromyographic activity during the non–weight-bearing condition. During crutch ambulation, electromyographic activity of the soleus was significantly reduced compared with that required for normal walking at all levels of weight-bearing load. In the vastus lateralis for the weight-bearing conditions, the ED Walker required significantly higher electromyographic activity than crutch ambulation (light: 105.0%⫾12.3% vs 72.7%⫾10.1%; heavy: 144.8%⫾23.5% vs 100.0%⫾13.5%). Both devices required similar peak vertical ground reaction forces during the heavy weight-bearing conditions (crutch: 75%⫾1.6%; ED Walker: 73%⫾1.8%), whereas axillary crutch gait produced less force than the ED Walker in the light condition (32%⫾2.0% vs 48%⫾1.6%). Conclusions: During walking with assistive devices, muscle activation patterns varied with weight-bearing load. The leg extensor muscles appeared to incur a greater reduction in muscle activity when compared with their flexor counterparts. Additionally, the ED Walker and axillary crutch differed with respect to their muscle activity levels and weight-bearing characteristics. Clinically, knowledge of these muscle activity and force characteristics may aid in the decision-making process of

From the Musculoskeletal Research Laboratory, Department of Exercise Science, Syracuse University (Clark, Manini, Ordway, Ploutz-Snyder) and the Departments of Orthopedic Surgery (Ordway) and Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (PloutzSnyder), SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY. Presented in part at the American College of Sports Medicine’s 49th Annual Meeting, May 29 –June 1, 2002, St. Louis, MO. No commercial party having a direct financial interest in the results of the research supporting this article has or will confer a benefit on the authors or on any organization with which the authors are associated. Reprint requests to Brian C. Clark, MS, Dept of Exercise Science, Syracuse University, 820 Comstock Ave, Rm 201, Syracuse, NY 13244, e-mail: [email protected]. 0003-9993/04/8509-8485$30.00/0 doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2003.09.011

prescribing a device type and timeline to follow in restoring weight-bearing loads. Key Words: Atrophy; Disuse; Crutches; Rehabilitation; Walkers; Walking. © 2004 by the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine and the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation NJURIES AND DISABILITIES associated with the lower Ition,extremities frequently result in the impairment of ambulafor which walking aids are commonly prescribed in an attempt to restore locomotory function.1 In general, these ambulatory devices allow for a reduction in the weight-bearing load placed on the affected or injured limb.2 One of the most commonly prescribed ambulation devices is the axillary crutch, which allows patients to transfer as much as 100% of body weight to the arms and axillary region during swinging gaits.1 In many cases, one of the negative side effects of using an axillary crutch is the inactivity of the associated limb skeletal muscle. The predominantly adaptive response to inactivity is skeletal muscle atrophy (a reduction in muscle size primarily due to reductions in the contractile proteins actin and myosin).3 Experimentally unloading the quadriceps femoris muscle group, using a limb suspension model that involves subjects performing ambulatory activity with crutches, causes reduced cross-sectional area of about 0.4% per day, or 14% to 16% decrements over a 5- to 6-week period.3-5 Additionally, strength losses in the range of 0.6% per day are usually observed.3 These disuse-induced deficits in skeletal muscle function persist for prolonged periods despite the resumption of normal activity levels and physical rehabilitation.6 Thus, because muscle strength is vital to physical functioning,7 the mitigation of muscle dysfunction during periods of unweighting and disuse are imperative.3 Recently, an ambulation device (ED Walker)a has been developed that allows for weight transfer through the pelvic girdle (fig 1). The ED Walker differs substantially from the standard axillary crutch: the base of support with the ED Walker is located on the medial side of the affected limb as opposed to the lateral side, and the knee joint is flexed more during ambulation with the ED Walker. Therefore, variations in muscle activity and ground reaction forces between these modes of ambulation would be expected. Despite the widespread use of axillary crutches and other ambulation devices, muscle activation patterns during walking with assistive devices have received little scientific attention.8 To our knowledge no study has evaluated the muscle activity of the lower-limb muscles during axillary crutch ambulation. Therefore, the aims of our study were to characterize the muscle activation patterns in healthy adults during assisted walking using the axillary crutch and to compare these characteristics with assisted walking with the ED Walker. Additionally, we wanted to determine how these devices differed with respect to musculoskeletal loading during self-selected variations of weight-bearing (non, light, heavy). Arch Phys Med Rehabil Vol 85, September 2004

1556

MUSCLE ACTIVITY AND ASSISTED WALKING, Clark

Fig 1. (A) The ED Walker is a newly designed assisted walking device that allows for weight transfer through the pelvic girdle. (B) A subject using the ED Walker device.

METHODS Participants Twelve subjects (7 men, 5 women) were recruited from a university and surrounding community to participate in this study. To ensure a wide age range of participants, we recruited 3 subjects each from the third, fourth, fifth, and sixth decades of life (23.3⫾2.5y, 33.0⫾4.4y, 46.6⫾1.5y, 56.7⫾4.9y, respectively) (total mean age, 39.6⫾13.6y). All subjects were healthy and recreationally active adults, with no current orthopedic limitations (mean weight, 79.7⫾20kg; mean height, 165⫾11.6cm). The experimental protocol was approved by the university’s institutional review board, and before testing all subjects provided written informed consent. Experimental Design Subjects participated in an orientation to become familiarized with assisted walking using the crutches and the ED Walker. Subjects then performed assisted walking with both devices at 3 varying weight-bearing levels (non, light, heavy). Additionally, subjects performed normal (unassisted) walking. Surface electromyographic activity was recorded from the vastus lateralis, biceps femoris, soleus, and anterior tibialis muscles on the test leg during trials. Device Fitting and Familiarization When the subjects reported to the laboratory, axillary crutch and ED Walker length were adjusted to match each subject’s Arch Phys Med Rehabil Vol 85, September 2004

height. For the crutches, approximately 1 hand width was allowed between the axilla and top of the crutches.9 For the ED Walker, approximately 3 to 5cm were allowed between the device seat and pelvic girdle when standing erect (manufacturer’s instructions). Next, subjects followed a familiarization protocol for assisted walking on the axillary crutches and the ED Walker; subjects were taught how to remove 100% of their body weight from a test leg with both devices (swing through gait pattern) and how to perform partial-weight– bearing gaits (crutches: 3-point gait; ED Walker: 2-point gait).1 Subjects were allowed to practice walking with light and heavy weightbearing loads, with forceplate feedback provided. Once the subjects felt comfortable performing the various types of ambulation, they practiced performing the tasks at a set cadence of 1 stride per 1.5 seconds. During all testing, this stride pace was kept constant via a metronome and investigator feedback. Again, subjects were allowed unlimited time to practice the tasks, and testing did not proceed until subjects felt comfortable with all types of ambulation. Testing Protocol During testing, subjects were first asked to perform 2 trials of normal walking gait (at least 10 stride cycles) while electromyographic activity was collected from vastus lateralis, anterior tibialis, soleus, and biceps femoris muscles over strides 4 to 8 and used to normalize the assisted walking electromyography. Next, subjects were asked to perform a similar amount of ambulation with the axillary crutch and the ED Walker (the

1557

MUSCLE ACTIVITY AND ASSISTED WALKING, Clark

order was counterbalanced among subjects). During these trials, subjects were randomly asked to perform 3 trials of swingthrough gait (non–weight-bearing) and gaits with a self-selected “light” and “heavy” weight-bearing load (10-stride cycles). Two trials were performed for each ambulatory condition. During the partial weight-bearing loads, subjects were instructed to ambulate placing a light and a heavy load on the test leg. We did not ask subjects to place a specific amount of weight on the test leg, because one of our interests was to determine to what extent the devices varied with respect to self-selected loads. During the orientation trials, we provided feedback to subjects if the conditions (light vs heavy) did not differ with respect to their ground reaction forces. During all trials, the peak vertical ground reaction force was recorded on the seventh stride cycle by force platforms that were embedded in the ground. Muscle Activity We evaluated the electromyographic activity of the vastus lateralis, biceps femoris, soleus, and anterior tibialis because of their role in locomotion and physical functioning.10 To assess muscle activity, we used surface electromyography, which is commonly used to assess muscle fiber action potential activity in skeletal muscle.11 Expression of the electromyographic signal in the time domain allows for evaluation of neuromuscular activation patterns, because a greater amplitude appears to be primarily due to an increase in the number of motor units recruited and increased motor unit discharge rate.12 After familiarization, 1 leg was prepped as the test leg. Before electrode application, the skin was shaved, abraded, and cleaned with alcohol to minimize skin impedance. Electromyographic signals were recorded with Ag/AgCl bipolar surface electrodes (diameter, 4cm; interelectrode distance, 25mm) from the vastus lateralis, anterior tibialis, soleus, and biceps femoris muscles. Reference electrodes were placed with respect to the differential electrodes on bony prominences. Electrode placement was chosen based on Cram and Kasman’s standardized electrode placement atlas.13 The analog signal was preamplified 100 times with a BioAmp 100b and then amplified 10 times with the use of a Cyber Amp 380b (total gain, 1000). The signal was band-pass filtered between 10 and 600Hz. The analog signal was digitized at 1000Hz with an analog-to-digital board via a data acquisition card.c The raw electromyographic signal was saved for subsequent analysis. To eliminate artifacts in the electromyographic signal, lead wires were secured to the subject to minimize movement. Forceplate Instrumentation Vertical ground reaction forces during ambulation were collected with a force platform.d Analog signals were collected with the same data acquisition system and sampling rate as the electromyographic activity. Treatment of the Data Interference electromyographic data from each trial were full-wave rectified, and total electromyographic activity over 5 stride cycles was determined (strides 4 – 8) using LabView software.e Average electromyographic activity from the 2 trials was calculated. The peak vertical ground reaction force was calculated and averaged using LabView. These values were used for all statistical analyses. Statistical Analysis To evaluate differences in electromyographic activity between the axillary crutch and ED Walker at each respective

loading condition, a repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted (dependent variable: electromyographic activity; within-subject independent variable: ambulation condition [unassisted walking, axillary crutches, ED Walker]). Additionally, a repeated-measures ANOVA was used to evaluate differences in weight-bearing characteristics between the 2 ambulation devices (dependent variable: force; within-subject independent variable: weight-bearing condition [unassisted walking, axillary crutches, ED Walker]). For graphic representation, the electromyographic activity and forces recorded during assisted walking were normalized to that of unassisted walking (expressed as a percentage of unassisted walking). Significant main effects were investigated with Sidak post hoc tests, with a preset ␣ level of significance of .05. All data are reported as mean ⫾ standard error (SE), unless otherwise noted. The SPSS statistical packagef was used for data analysis. RESULTS Muscle Activity Vastus lateralis. Both devices allowed for significant reductions in vastus lateralis electromyographic activity during the swing-through (non–weight-bearing) gait when compared with normal walking (Pⱕ.05) (fig 2A, table 1). Additionally, during the light weight-bearing condition, vastus lateralis electromyographic activation was reduced as compared with normal walking (Pⱕ.05) (fig 2A, table 1). In both the light and heavy weight-bearing conditions, the ED Walker yielded 45% higher levels of vastus lateralis electromyographic activation than the axillary crutch (Pⱕ.05) (fig 2A, table 1). Biceps femoris. During the light weight-bearing gait using the ED Walker, a 32% greater electromyographic activity was recorded when compared with that using the crutches (P⬍.05) (fig 2B, table 1). Large increases in biceps femoris muscle activity were observed during the non–weight-bearing condition using the crutches and the ED Walker when compared with normal walking (Pⱕ.05) (fig 2B, table 1). During the heavy weight-bearing condition, the ED Walker required increased biceps femoris electromyographic activity when compared with normal walking (Pⱕ.05) (fig 2B, table 1). Anterior tibialis. For the non–weight-bearing condition (swing-through gait), electromyographic activity during crutch ambulation was greater than that required for normal walking (Pⱕ.05) (fig 2C, table 1). The light weight-bearing gaits resulted in a 34% decrease in electromyographic activity when compared with normal walking for both devices (Pⱕ.05) (fig 2C, table 1). Additionally, during the heavy weight-bearing condition, the crutches resulted in a 17% decrease in electromyographic activity when compared with normal walking (Pⱕ.05) (fig 2C, table 1). For the anterior tibialis muscle, the only activation differences between the 2 devices was during the heavy weight-bearing condition, with the ED Walker electromyographic activity being 24.5% higher (Pⱕ.05) (fig 2C, table 1). Soleus. Ambulation with the crutches resulted in significant decreases in soleus electromyographic activity at all levels of weight-bearing load when compared with normal walking (Pⱕ.05) (fig 2D, table 1). The ED Walker resulted in decreased soleus electromyographic activity versus that of normal walking only during non–weight bearing gait (Pⱕ.05) (fig 2D, table 1). During the light weight-bearing condition, the ED Walker required a greater amount of electromyographic activity than the axillary crutches (Pⱕ.05) (fig 2D, table 1). Arch Phys Med Rehabil Vol 85, September 2004

1558

MUSCLE ACTIVITY AND ASSISTED WALKING, Clark

Fig 2. Electromyographic activity of the (A) vastus lateralis, (B) biceps femoris, (C) tibialis anterior, and (D) soleus muscles during assisted walking with the axillary crutch and ED Walker at 3 different weight-bearing loads. The black horizontal lines at 100% represent electromyographic activity required for normal walking. Abbreviation: EMG, electromyographic activity. *ED Walker greater than axillary crutch (P