Neurophysiological assessment of lower-limb voluntary control in incomplete spinal cord injury.

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional retrospective study of a neurophysiological method of voluntary motor control characterization. OBJECTIVES: This study was undertaken to validate the surface electromyography (sEMG)-based voluntary response index (VRI) as an objective, quantitative, laboratory measure of spinal cord injury severity in terms of voluntary motor control disruption. SETTING: VA Medical Centers in Houston and Dallas Texas, USA. METHODS: A total of 67 subjects with incomplete spinal cord injury (iSCI), American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS)-C (n = 32) and -D (n = 35) were studied. sEMG recorded during a standardized protocol including eight lower-limb voluntary motor tasks was analyzed using the VRI method that relates multi-muscle activation patterns of SCI persons to those of healthy-subject prototypes (n = 15). The VRI is composed of a measure of the amount of the sEMG activity (magnitude) and the distribution of activity across muscle groups compared to that of healthy subjects for each motor task (similarity index, SI). These resulting VRI components, normalized magnitude and SI, were compared to AIS clinical findings in this study. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to determine the SI values best separating AIS-C and AIS-D subjects. RESULTS: Magnitude and SI for AIS-C subjects had mean values of 0.27 +/- 0.32 and 0.65 +/- 0.21, respectively. Both parameters were significantly larger in the AIS-D subjects (0.78 +/- 0.43 and 0.93 +/- 0.06), respectively (P < 0.01). An SI value of 0.85 was found to separate AIS-C and AIS-D groups with a sensitivity of 0.89 and a specificity of 0.81. Further, the VRI of each leg strongly correlated with the respective AIS motor score (0.80, r < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In the domains of voluntary motor control, the sEMG-based VRI demonstrated adequate face validity and sensitivity to injury severity as currently measured by the AIS. SPONSORSHIP: Veterans Affairs Medical Center.

Clinical neurophysiological assessment of residual motor control in post-spinal cord injury paralysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to characterize the rudimentary residual lower-limb motor control that can exist in clinically paralyzed spinal-cord-injured individuals. METHODS: Sixty-seven paralyzed spinal-cord-injured subjects were studied using surface electromyography recorded from muscles of the lower limbs and analyzed for responses to a rigidly administered protocol of reinforcement maneuvers, voluntary movement attempts, vibration, or the ability to volitionally suppress withdrawal evoked by plantar surface stimulation. RESULTS: Markers for the subclinical discomplete motor syndrome were found in 64% of the subjects. The tonic vibration response was recorded in 37%, volitional plantar surface stimulation response suppression in 27%, and reinforcement maneuver responses in 6% of the subjects. Three subjects, 4%, produced reliable but very low amplitude surface electromyography during the voluntary movement segment of the protocol. Surface electromyography recorded during passive leg movement was related to Ashworth scores as was the tonic vibration response marker (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Multimuscle surface electromyography patterns recorded during a rigidly administered protocol of motor tasks can be used to differentiate between clinically paralyzed spinal-cord-injured individuals using subclinical motor output to identify the translesional neural connections that remain available for intervention testing and treatment planning after spinal cord injury.

Toward an objective interpretation of surface EMG patterns: a voluntary response index (VRI).

Individuals with incomplete spinal cord injuries (SCI) retain varying degrees of voluntary motor control. The complexity of the motor control system and the nature of the recording biophysics have inhibited efforts to develop objective measures of voluntary motor control. This paper proposes the definition and use of a voluntary response index (VRI) calculated from quantitative analysis of surface electromyographic (sEMG) data recorded during defined voluntary movement as a sensitive measure of voluntary motor control in such individuals. The VRI is comprised of two numeric values, one derived from the total muscle activity recorded for the voluntary motor task (magnitude), and the other from the sEMG distribution across the recorded muscles (similarity index (SI)). Calculated as a vector, the distribution of sEMG from the test subject is compared to the average vector calculated from sEMG recordings of the same motor task from 10 neurologically intact subjects in a protocol called brain motor control assessment (BMCA). To evaluate the stability of the VRI, a group of five healthy subjects were individually compared to the prototype, average healthy-subject vectors for all of the maneuvers. To evaluate the sensitivity of this method, the VRI was obtained from two SCI subjects participating in other research studies. One was undergoing supported treadmill ambulation training, and the other a controlled withdrawal of anti-spasticity medications. The supported treadmill training patient's VRI, calculated from pre- and post-training BMCA recordings, reflected the qualitative changes in sEMG patterns and functional improvement of motor control. The VRI of the patient followed by serial BMCA during medication withdrawal also reflected changes in the motor control as a result of changes in anti-spasticity medication. To validate this index for clinical use, serial studies using larger numbers of subjects with compromised motor control should be performed.

Altered motor control and spasticity after spinal cord injury: subjective and objective assessment.

This study of measures of spasticity, or altered motor control, compares the clinically used Ashworth scale with a method based on surface electromyographic (sEMG) recordings called brain motor control assessment (BMCA) in a group of 97 subjects with spinal cord injury (SCI) and varying levels of motor dysfunction. In this paper, we describe how sEMG-derived scores relate to the severity of spasticity as judged clinically. When sEMG data from passive movements from the BMCA were analyzed by Ashworth category, we found that when the sEMG data were averaged for a limb, there was a significant difference between scores for those with Ashworth 0 vs. 2 and 3, and 1 vs. 2 and 3 (p<0.001), but not between 0 and 1. Analysis of the individual muscle scores improved the discrimination between Ashworth categories. Superiority of sEMG data over Ashworth category as an objective quantification of altered motor control ("spasticity") is argued.

Relating clinical and neurophysiological assessment of spasticity by machine learning.

Spasticity following spinal cord injury (SCI) is most often assessed clinically using a five-point Ashworth score (AS). A more objective assessment of altered motor control may be achieved by using a comprehensive protocol based on a surface electromyographic (sEMG) activity recorded from thigh and leg muscles. However, the relationship between the clinical and neurophysiological assessments is still unknown. In this paper we employ three different classification methods to investigate this relationship. The experimental results indicate that, if the appropriate set of sEMG features is used, the neurophysiological assessment is related to clinical findings and can be used to predict the AS. A comprehensive sEMG assessment may be proven useful as an objective method of evaluating the effectiveness of various interventions and for follow-up of SCI patients.

Gabapentin for the treatment of spasticity in patients with spinal cord injury.

Our serendipitous observations suggested that some patients with spasticity appeared to have improved following the administration of the anticonvulsant drug gabapentin. As some patients with spasticity are either refractory to or intolerant of established medical treatments, we conducted this study to investigate the effect of gabapentin on spasticity in patients with spinal cord injury. Twenty-five patients with spinal cord injury and spasticity received oral gabapentin (2400 mg over 48 h) in a randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled crossover study. We assessed responses by measuring the Ashworth spasticity scale, muscle stretch reflexes, presence of clonus and reflex response to noxious stimuli. Patient ratings were obtained using a Likert Scale. Administration of gabapentin, but not placebo, was associated with an 11% reduction in spasticity as measured by the Ashworth Scale (P = 0.04) and by a 20% reduction in the Likert Scale (P = 0.0013). Significant changes were not obtained for the other measures. The data obtained suggest that gabapentin may be useful in the management of spasticity associated with spinal cord injury.

Effectiveness of gabapentin in controlling spasticity: a quantitative study.

The purpose of this investigation was to study the effectiveness of gabapentin in controlling spasticity in persons with spinal cord injury (SCI) using a surface EMG-based quantitative assessment technique called the brain motor control assessment (BMCA). Six men from a Veterans Affairs Medical Center with spasticity due to traumatic SCI were studied as part of a multi-center, placebo-controlled, cross-over, clinical trial of gabapentin. Spasticity was evaluated using multi-channel surface EMG recordings of muscles in the lower extremities, abdomen and low back before and during treatment with oral gabapentin or placebo. Gabapentin or placebo was given orally in doses 400 mg three times daily for 48 h. Following a 10 day wash-out period subjects were crossed-over to receive the medication not received the first time. This was followed by an elective open-label extension. Group results during the controlled trial did not reach statistical significance at the dosage used. One subject demonstrated a dramatic improvement in spasticity that was apparent both clinically and with the BMCA. Other subjects demonstrated modest improvements which were seen in the BMCA but not recognized clinically. During the open label extension, the four subjects who participated experienced important clinical improvements with higher doses (to 3600 mg/day). These improvements were often in components of spasticity in which the BMCA had detected subclinical changes during the cross-over trial. A seventh subject was studied using the BMCA at doses of 1200 mg T.I.D. gabapentin, off gabapentin and 800 mg T.I.D. gabapentin and demonstrated quantitatively a dose-related effect with higher doses of gabapentin which matched clinical observations. Gabapentin at doses of 400 mg T.I.D. may be effective in controlling some features of spasticity in persons with SCI. Higher doses provide greater control of spasticity, and controlled studies using higher doses are needed to evaluate gabapentin's efficacy.

Consistency of multi-channel surface EMG recordings: Application in spinal cord injured subjects.

We evaluated the consistency of serial polyelectromyographic recordings of altered motor control in spinal cord injured (SCI) individuals. Using 12 pairs of surface electrodes placed over major muscle groups of lower limb and trunk, we examined voluntary and involuntary and phasic and tonic features of motor control using a standardized protocol for brain motor control assessment (BMCA). The surface electromyographic (EMG) data were digitized and analysed on the basis of the root mean square (RMS) envelope of activity, with the exception of phasic tendon tap responses which were evaluated from full bandwidth EMG data. The average amplitudes of responses were calculated. The median correlation of the results from two successive examinations 1-2 weeks apart for all subjects was 0.98. Further analysis was based on ratios of corresponding elements from the two studies. Noise from null responses was suppressed by incorporating a threshold parameter T set to 1 muV(RMS). With this value, pairs of studies in 52 subjects were virtually identical (mean ratio of 1.02 +/- 0.1). Z-scores from two case studies in which pharmacological and physiological interventions changed motor control demonstrated the utility of the procedure. This method offers a reliable and appropriate means of studying altered motor control which is sensitive to changes induced after interventions.

Clinical assessment of spasticity in spinal cord injury: a multidimensional problem.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the relation between various components of spasticity evaluated clinically in persons with spinal cord injury (SCI). DESIGN: Case series evaluating spasticity using clinical scales commonly referenced in contemporary literature, including the Penn Spasm Frequency Scale, the Ashworth Scale, and standard scales of tendon taps, clonus, and plantar stimulation. SETTING. A Veterans Affairs Medical Center Spinal Cord Injury Center. PATIENTS. Eighty-five spinal cord injured individuals with varying degrees of spasticity. RESULTS: Correlations demonstrated weak relationships between Spasm Frequency Scale and self-report scales of interference with function (.407) and painful spasms (.312). No clinical examination score correlated with self-report scores greater than 0.4. Three clinical examination scores correlated modestly (> 0.5)-Ashworth score with patellar tendon taps (.553), ankle clonus with Achilles tendon tap (.663), and patellar tendon tap with adductor tendon tap (.512). Two other clinical scales correlated weakly (> 0.4)-Achilles tendon tap with patellar tendon tap (.417) and plantar reflex with adductor tendon taps (.423). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical scales currently used to evaluate spasticity in SCI correlate poorly with each other, suggesting that they each assess different aspects of spasticity. The use of any single scale is likely to underrepresent the magnitude and severity of spasticity in the SCI population. In the absence of agreement among these various scales and with the absence of an appropriate criterion standard for evaluation of spasticity, assessments of spasticity, whether clinical or neurophysiological in nature, should be comprehensive in scope.

Effect of mexiletine on spinal cord injury dysesthetic pain.

Severe pain occurs in 5-30% of the spinal cord-injured (SCI) population and is difficult to treat. Subarachnoid lidocaine has been used in selected patients with some success. Mexiletine, an analog of lidocaine that acts at Na+/K+ channels in the peripheral nerve, has been found effective in persons with diabetic dysesthetic neuropathy. The effect of mexiletine in the treatment of spinal cord dysesthetic pain was examined in this study. Fifteen patients were enrolled, and 11 patients completed the prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, crossover design trial. Inclusion/exclusion criteria were carefully defined. A 1-wk washout period was followed by a 4-wk drug trial of either mexiletine (450 mg/day) or placebo. This was repeated for the second medication in the second arm of the study. Patients were followed weekly with McGill and visual analog pain scales. Baseline, midpoint, and endpoint Barthel function scores were recorded. The Wilcoxon's signed-rank test and paired t test were used for statistical analysis. Results showed no significant effect of mexiletine on SCI dysesthetic pain scales or Barthel index. In conclusion, in this trial, mexiletine did not appear to decrease spinal cord injury-related dysesthetic pain.

The interobserver reliability of the revised American Spinal Injury Association standards for neurological classification of spinal injury patients.

To test the interobserver reliability of clinicians using the American Spinal Injury Association's 1989 revised "Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Injury Patients," two quizzes were given to 15 house officers and physician faculty members of a department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. The first quiz consisted of five spinal cord injury cases of varying degrees of complexity. The participants were asked to classify each case with respect to sensory level, motor level, zone of injury and Frankel classification by using the original standards. Two months later, after a brief explanation of the significant changes in the revised standards, the same group was given five slightly different cases to classify. With the use of the 1989 revision of the standards, the percent correct improved for Frankel grade (65-81%), motor level (59-85%), sensory level (71-93%) and zone of injury (31-89%). Many of the same type of errors were repeated in both quizzes, i.e., T-12 and L-1 sensory level distinction and the classification of thoracic motor levels. We conclude that the interobserver reliability for the revised ASIA standards, although improved, continues to be less than optimal. We recommend that changes clarifying sensory levels near the inguinal ligament and motor level classification with very incomplete injuries be made in the standards. In addition, training methods should be developed to improve the interobserver reliability of the standards when they are used by clinicians and researchers.