Increased gait variability during robot-assisted walking is accompanied by increased sensorimotor brain activity in healthy people.
Brain activity
Functional near-infrared spectroscopy
GRF
Gait variability
Neuroimaging
Neurorehabilitation
RAGT
Robotic rehabilitation
Walking
fNIRS
Journal
Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation
ISSN: 1743-0003
Titre abrégé: J Neuroeng Rehabil
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101232233
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
27 12 2019
27 12 2019
Historique:
received:
20
08
2019
accepted:
13
12
2019
entrez:
29
12
2019
pubmed:
29
12
2019
medline:
1
7
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Gait disorders are major symptoms of neurological diseases affecting the quality of life. Interventions that restore walking and allow patients to maintain safe and independent mobility are essential. Robot-assisted gait training (RAGT) proved to be a promising treatment for restoring and improving the ability to walk. Due to heterogenuous study designs and fragmentary knowlegde about the neural correlates associated with RAGT and the relation to motor recovery, guidelines for an individually optimized therapy can hardly be derived. To optimize robotic rehabilitation, it is crucial to understand how robotic assistance affect locomotor control and its underlying brain activity. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the effects of robotic assistance (RA) during treadmill walking (TW) on cortical activity and the relationship between RA-related changes of cortical activity and biomechanical gait characteristics. Twelve healthy, right-handed volunteers (9 females; M = 25 ± 4 years) performed unassisted walking (UAW) and robot-assisted walking (RAW) trials on a treadmill, at 2.8 km/h, in a randomized, within-subject design. Ground reaction forces (GRFs) provided information regarding the individual gait patterns, while brain activity was examined by measuring cerebral hemodynamic changes in brain regions associated with the cortical locomotor network, including the sensorimotor cortex (SMC), premotor cortex (PMC) and supplementary motor area (SMA), using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS). A statistically significant increase in brain activity was observed in the SMC compared with the PMC and SMA (p < 0.05), and a classical double bump in the vertical GRF was observed during both UAW and RAW throughout the stance phase. However, intraindividual gait variability increased significantly with RA and was correlated with increased brain activity in the SMC (p = 0.05; r = 0.57). On the one hand, robotic guidance could generate sensory feedback that promotes active participation, leading to increased gait variability and somatosensory brain activity. On the other hand, changes in brain activity and biomechanical gait characteristics may also be due to the sensory feedback of the robot, which disrupts the cortical network of automated walking in healthy individuals. More comprehensive neurophysiological studies both in laboratory and in clinical settings are necessary to investigate the entire brain network associated with RAW.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Gait disorders are major symptoms of neurological diseases affecting the quality of life. Interventions that restore walking and allow patients to maintain safe and independent mobility are essential. Robot-assisted gait training (RAGT) proved to be a promising treatment for restoring and improving the ability to walk. Due to heterogenuous study designs and fragmentary knowlegde about the neural correlates associated with RAGT and the relation to motor recovery, guidelines for an individually optimized therapy can hardly be derived. To optimize robotic rehabilitation, it is crucial to understand how robotic assistance affect locomotor control and its underlying brain activity. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the effects of robotic assistance (RA) during treadmill walking (TW) on cortical activity and the relationship between RA-related changes of cortical activity and biomechanical gait characteristics.
METHODS
Twelve healthy, right-handed volunteers (9 females; M = 25 ± 4 years) performed unassisted walking (UAW) and robot-assisted walking (RAW) trials on a treadmill, at 2.8 km/h, in a randomized, within-subject design. Ground reaction forces (GRFs) provided information regarding the individual gait patterns, while brain activity was examined by measuring cerebral hemodynamic changes in brain regions associated with the cortical locomotor network, including the sensorimotor cortex (SMC), premotor cortex (PMC) and supplementary motor area (SMA), using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS).
RESULTS
A statistically significant increase in brain activity was observed in the SMC compared with the PMC and SMA (p < 0.05), and a classical double bump in the vertical GRF was observed during both UAW and RAW throughout the stance phase. However, intraindividual gait variability increased significantly with RA and was correlated with increased brain activity in the SMC (p = 0.05; r = 0.57).
CONCLUSIONS
On the one hand, robotic guidance could generate sensory feedback that promotes active participation, leading to increased gait variability and somatosensory brain activity. On the other hand, changes in brain activity and biomechanical gait characteristics may also be due to the sensory feedback of the robot, which disrupts the cortical network of automated walking in healthy individuals. More comprehensive neurophysiological studies both in laboratory and in clinical settings are necessary to investigate the entire brain network associated with RAW.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31882008
doi: 10.1186/s12984-019-0636-3
pii: 10.1186/s12984-019-0636-3
pmc: PMC6935063
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
161Références
Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 2011 Jan;17(1):1-9
pubmed: 20833572
Neuroimage. 2015 May 15;112:318-326
pubmed: 25818687
Front Hum Neurosci. 2014 Feb 25;8:93
pubmed: 24611043
J Neurosci Methods. 2014 Jul 30;232:152-6
pubmed: 24880046
J Neurol Rehabil. 1995;9(4):183-90
pubmed: 11539274
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013 Jun;94(6):1202-6
pubmed: 23168401
Neuroimage. 2012 Nov 15;63(3):1203-11
pubmed: 22906791
Neurol Sci. 2016 Apr;37(4):503-14
pubmed: 26781943
Gait Posture. 2005 Aug;22(1):51-6
pubmed: 15996592
Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2014;2014:6361-4
pubmed: 25571451
Aging Clin Exp Res. 2010 Oct-Dec;22(5-6):387-94
pubmed: 21422794
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2017 Dec;83:160-172
pubmed: 29017917
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2010 Sep 10;7:43
pubmed: 20828422
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2015 Oct;57:310-27
pubmed: 26306029
Neuroimage. 2010 May 1;50(4):1589-98
pubmed: 20034578
Stroke. 2007 Feb;38(2):349-54
pubmed: 17204680
Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2006;2006:2698-701
pubmed: 17946976
Neuroimage. 2014 Jan 15;85 Pt 1:415-22
pubmed: 23631980
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2015 Jan 05;12:1
pubmed: 25557982
Neuroimage. 2004 Nov;23(3):1020-6
pubmed: 15528102
Front Robot AI. 2019 Oct 31;6:109
pubmed: 33501124
Med Eng Phys. 2011 Jun;33(5):626-32
pubmed: 21288759
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2019 Feb 6;16(1):26
pubmed: 30728040
J Rehabil Res Dev. 1995 Oct;32(3):236-44
pubmed: 8592295
NeuroRehabilitation. 2014;34(3):447-53
pubmed: 24463231
Mult Scler. 2012 Jun;18(6):881-90
pubmed: 22146609
Age Ageing. 2012 Mar;41(2):155-61
pubmed: 22156556
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2018 Apr 25;15(1):35
pubmed: 29695280
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2005 Feb;20(2):184-93
pubmed: 15621324
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1989 Feb;21(1):110-4
pubmed: 2927295
Neuroimage. 2001 Nov;14(5):1186-92
pubmed: 11697950
Mult Scler. 2008 Mar;14(2):231-6
pubmed: 17942510
J Rehabil Res Dev. 2000 Nov-Dec;37(6):693-700
pubmed: 11321005
Adv Exp Med Biol. 1988;222:183-9
pubmed: 3129910
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2017 Mar 23;14(1):24
pubmed: 28330471
Neuroimage. 2008 Jun;41(2):233-42
pubmed: 18395469
Ann Rehabil Med. 2014 Apr;38(2):145-52
pubmed: 24855607
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Sep 03;9:CD006876
pubmed: 30175845
Biomed Tech (Berl). 2013 Sep 7;58 Suppl 1:
pubmed: 24043185
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2016 Jul;36:65-73
pubmed: 27214248
Hum Mov Sci. 2007 Aug;26(4):555-89
pubmed: 17618701
Phys Ther. 2009 Aug;89(8):829-39
pubmed: 19520734
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2015 Sep 10;12(9):11328-44
pubmed: 26378556
J Biomech. 2016 Jan 25;49(2):229-37
pubmed: 26725217
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2006 Feb;54(2):255-61
pubmed: 16460376
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005 Apr;86(4):672-80
pubmed: 15827916
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2019 Feb 28;16(1):33
pubmed: 30819259
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2018 Nov;32(11):976-987
pubmed: 30411674
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 May 10;5:CD006185
pubmed: 28488268
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2017 Apr 20;14(1):32
pubmed: 28427422
Front Hum Neurosci. 2014 Jul 08;8:485
pubmed: 25071515
IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2005 Sep;13(3):380-94
pubmed: 16200761
J Neurol Phys Ther. 2006 Sep;30(3):120-9
pubmed: 17029655
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2013 Jul 18;10:78
pubmed: 23867005
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2008 Dec;23(10):1251-9
pubmed: 18849098
NeuroRehabilitation. 2016;38(2):171-8
pubmed: 26923356
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2013 Jul 19;10:79
pubmed: 23870328
Neuroimage. 2007 Feb 15;34(4):1600-11
pubmed: 17207640
Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 2011 Nov;17(9):693-7
pubmed: 21820940
Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2012;2012:2764-7
pubmed: 23366498
Front Hum Neurosci. 2015 May 12;9:247
pubmed: 26029077
J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2003 Jan;23(1):1-18
pubmed: 12500086
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2012 Oct 08;9:76
pubmed: 23043818
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2008 Sep 01;5:19
pubmed: 18761735
Neuroimage. 2002 Oct;17(2):719-31
pubmed: 12377147
Neuropsychologia. 1971 Mar;9(1):97-113
pubmed: 5146491
Phys Ther. 2006 Nov;86(11):1466-78
pubmed: 17079746
Can J Appl Physiol. 2004 Aug;29(4):463-87
pubmed: 15328595
Neuroscientist. 2003 Jun;9(3):195-204
pubmed: 15065815
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2010 Oct 14;7:51
pubmed: 20946640
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009 Jan;23(1):5-13
pubmed: 19109447
PM R. 2013 Apr;5(4):280-90
pubmed: 23200117
Stroke. 2007 Jul;38(7):2096-100
pubmed: 17510461
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012 Mar;93(3):404-12
pubmed: 22209475
IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2010 Feb;18(1):38-48
pubmed: 20194054
Brain. 2019 Aug 1;142(8):2182-2197
pubmed: 31257411
Front Hum Neurosci. 2019 Jun 05;13:172
pubmed: 31231200
J Physiol. 2012 May 15;590(10):2443-52
pubmed: 22393252
Mult Scler. 2016 Mar;22(3):373-84
pubmed: 26658817
Phys Med Biol. 2004 Jul 21;49(14):N255-7
pubmed: 15357206
Neurophotonics. 2017 Oct;4(4):041403
pubmed: 28924563
PLoS One. 2015 Oct 20;10(10):e0140626
pubmed: 26485148
J Mot Behav. 1986 Mar;18(1):5-16
pubmed: 15136282
J Clin Neurosci. 2018 Feb;48:11-17
pubmed: 29208476
Front Neurol. 2013 Nov 13;4:184
pubmed: 24312073
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2008 Nov-Dec;22(6):661-71
pubmed: 18971381
Spinal Cord. 2011 Oct;49(10):1062-7
pubmed: 21625239
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2012 May;26(4):353-61
pubmed: 22258155
J Rehabil Res Dev. 1995 Feb;32(1):25-31
pubmed: 7760264