Limits...
Comparison of muscle activity patterns of transfemoral amputees and control subjects during walking.

Wentink EC, Prinsen EC, Rietman JS, Veltink PH - J Neuroeng Rehabil (2013)

Bottom Line: In this study EMG activity during gait of the upper leg muscles of six transfemoral amputees, measured inside their own socket, was compared to that of five controls.For the subsequent (pre) swing phase the main differences were found in muscle activity patterns of the prosthetic limb, more muscles were active during this phase and/or with prolonged duration.The overall inter-subject variability was larger in amputees compared to controls.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Mathematics and Computer Science, Biomedical Signals and Systems group, University of Twente, Drienerlolaan 5, Enschede 7500 AE, The Netherlands. e.c.wentink@utwente.nl

ABSTRACT

Background: Only few studies have looked at electromyography (EMG) during prosthetic gait. Differences in EMG between normal and prosthetic gait for stance and swing phase were never separately analyzed. These differences can give valuable information if and how muscle activity changes in prosthetic gait.

Methods: In this study EMG activity during gait of the upper leg muscles of six transfemoral amputees, measured inside their own socket, was compared to that of five controls. On and off timings for stance and swing phase were determined together with the level of co-activity and inter-subject variability.

Results and conclusions: Gait phase changes in amputees mainly consisted of an increased double support phase preceding the prosthetic stance phase. For the subsequent (pre) swing phase the main differences were found in muscle activity patterns of the prosthetic limb, more muscles were active during this phase and/or with prolonged duration. The overall inter-subject variability was larger in amputees compared to controls.

Show MeSH
Raw EMG data. An example of filtered activity of all upper and lower leg muscles, of one subject during one trial. The row on the left shows the raw data of the trial during one gait cycle. The middle row shows the high pass filtered (HPf), rectified and low-pass filtered (LPf) data of the same trial and the right hand row shows the linear envelope HPf at 10Hz, rectified and LPf at 9Hz.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3750514&req=5

Figure 1: Raw EMG data. An example of filtered activity of all upper and lower leg muscles, of one subject during one trial. The row on the left shows the raw data of the trial during one gait cycle. The middle row shows the high pass filtered (HPf), rectified and low-pass filtered (LPf) data of the same trial and the right hand row shows the linear envelope HPf at 10Hz, rectified and LPf at 9Hz.

Mentions: EMG data was first high pass filtered at 10Hz and subsequently low pass filtered at 500Hz, both with a second order butterworth filter. In Figures 1, 2, 3, and 4 the ensemble averages of all amputees and controls separately are provided, including the raw and filtered data of one subject, of one trial for all muscles. In Figure 1 an example of filtered data is presented. For on and off detection the data was rectified and integrated (IA) in a window of 20 samples, a post processor of 4 windows was used. The threshold for on/off detection was determined per muscle. A period of rest activity was selected, and the mean IA value of this period plus three times the standard deviation was used as threshold for onset and termination of muscle activity [15-17]. For each muscle, each stride and each subject the on/off timings were calculated. These timings were averaged per subject, to get the on and off timings per muscle, per subject.


Comparison of muscle activity patterns of transfemoral amputees and control subjects during walking.

Wentink EC, Prinsen EC, Rietman JS, Veltink PH - J Neuroeng Rehabil (2013)

Raw EMG data. An example of filtered activity of all upper and lower leg muscles, of one subject during one trial. The row on the left shows the raw data of the trial during one gait cycle. The middle row shows the high pass filtered (HPf), rectified and low-pass filtered (LPf) data of the same trial and the right hand row shows the linear envelope HPf at 10Hz, rectified and LPf at 9Hz.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3750514&req=5

Figure 1: Raw EMG data. An example of filtered activity of all upper and lower leg muscles, of one subject during one trial. The row on the left shows the raw data of the trial during one gait cycle. The middle row shows the high pass filtered (HPf), rectified and low-pass filtered (LPf) data of the same trial and the right hand row shows the linear envelope HPf at 10Hz, rectified and LPf at 9Hz.
Mentions: EMG data was first high pass filtered at 10Hz and subsequently low pass filtered at 500Hz, both with a second order butterworth filter. In Figures 1, 2, 3, and 4 the ensemble averages of all amputees and controls separately are provided, including the raw and filtered data of one subject, of one trial for all muscles. In Figure 1 an example of filtered data is presented. For on and off detection the data was rectified and integrated (IA) in a window of 20 samples, a post processor of 4 windows was used. The threshold for on/off detection was determined per muscle. A period of rest activity was selected, and the mean IA value of this period plus three times the standard deviation was used as threshold for onset and termination of muscle activity [15-17]. For each muscle, each stride and each subject the on/off timings were calculated. These timings were averaged per subject, to get the on and off timings per muscle, per subject.

Bottom Line: In this study EMG activity during gait of the upper leg muscles of six transfemoral amputees, measured inside their own socket, was compared to that of five controls.For the subsequent (pre) swing phase the main differences were found in muscle activity patterns of the prosthetic limb, more muscles were active during this phase and/or with prolonged duration.The overall inter-subject variability was larger in amputees compared to controls.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Mathematics and Computer Science, Biomedical Signals and Systems group, University of Twente, Drienerlolaan 5, Enschede 7500 AE, The Netherlands. e.c.wentink@utwente.nl

ABSTRACT

Background: Only few studies have looked at electromyography (EMG) during prosthetic gait. Differences in EMG between normal and prosthetic gait for stance and swing phase were never separately analyzed. These differences can give valuable information if and how muscle activity changes in prosthetic gait.

Methods: In this study EMG activity during gait of the upper leg muscles of six transfemoral amputees, measured inside their own socket, was compared to that of five controls. On and off timings for stance and swing phase were determined together with the level of co-activity and inter-subject variability.

Results and conclusions: Gait phase changes in amputees mainly consisted of an increased double support phase preceding the prosthetic stance phase. For the subsequent (pre) swing phase the main differences were found in muscle activity patterns of the prosthetic limb, more muscles were active during this phase and/or with prolonged duration. The overall inter-subject variability was larger in amputees compared to controls.

Show MeSH