Increased EMG response following electromyographic biofeedback treatment of rectus femoris muscle after spinal cord injury

Imagem de Miniatura
Arquivos
art_BIASE_Increased_EMG_response_following_electromyographic_biofeedback_treatment_of_2011.PDF (136.55 KB)
Citações na Scopus
12
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2011
DOI
Scopus
Web of Science
PubMed
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
ELSEVIER SCI LTD
Autores
BIASE, M. E. M. De
POLITTI, F.
PALOMARI, E. T.
Citação
PHYSIOTHERAPY, v.97, n.2, p.175-179, 2011
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
Objective To study increases in electromyographic (EMG) response from the right and left rectus femoris muscles of individuals with long-term cervical spinal cord injuries after EMG biofeedback treatment. Design Repeated measure trials compared EMG responses before and after biofeedback treatment in patients with spinal cord injuries. Main outcome measures The Neuroeducator was used to analyse and provide feedback of the EMG signal and to measure EMG response. Setting Department of Traumatic Orthopaedics, School of Medicine, University of Sao Paulo, Brazil. Participants Twenty subjects (three men and 17 women), between 21 and 49 years of age, with incomplete spinal cord injury at level C6 or higher (range C2 to C6). Of these subjects, 10 received their spinal cord injuries from motor vehicle accidents, one from a gunshot, five from diving, three from falls and one from spinal disc herniation. Results Significant differences were found in the EMG response of the right rectus femoris muscle between pre-initial (T1), post-initial (T2) and additional (T3) biofeedback treatment with the subjects in a sitting position [mean (standard deviation) T1: 26 mu V (29); T2: 67 mu V (50); T3: 77 mu V (62)]. The mean differences and 95% confidence intervals for these comparisons were as follows: T1 to T2, -40.7 (-53.1 to -29.4); T2 to T3, -9.6 (-26.1 to 2.3). Similar differences were found for the left leg in a sitting position and for both legs in the sit-to-stand condition. Conclusions The EMG responses obtained in this study showed that treatment involving EMG biofeedback significantly increased voluntary EMG responses from right and left rectus femoris muscles in individuals with spinal cord injuries.
Palavras-chave
Electromyography, Biofeedback, Spinal cord injury, Lower limb, Rehabilitation, Rectus femoris muscle
URI
https://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/23265
Referências
  1. American Spinal Injury Association, 2002, INT STAND NEUR CLASS
  2. Hermens HJ, 2000, J ELECTROMYOGR KINES, V10, P361, DOI 10.1016/S1050-6411(00)00027-4
  3. Hagg T, 2006, J NEUROTRAUM, V23, P264
  4. ASHWORTH B, 1964, PRACTITIONER, V192, P540
  5. STEIN RB, 1990, J NEUROL NEUROSUR PS, V53, P880, DOI 10.1136/jnnp.53.10.880
  6. Ramer LM, 2005, SPINAL CORD, V43, P134, DOI 10.1038/sj.sc.3101715
  7. Norton JA, 2006, J NEUROPHYSIOL, V95, P2580, DOI 10.1152/jn.01289.2005
  8. Lynskey JV, 2008, J REHABIL RES DEV, V45, P229, DOI 10.1682/JRRD.2007.03.0047
  9. LEVY WJ, 1990, BRAIN RES, V510, P130, DOI 10.1016/0006-8993(90)90738-W
  10. Raineteau O, 2001, NAT REV NEUROSCI, V2, P263, DOI 10.1038/35067570
  11. van Tuijl JH, 2002, SPINAL CORD, V40, P51, DOI 10.1038/sj.sc.3101261
  12. Thomas SL, 2005, J NEUROPHYSIOL, V94, P2844, DOI 10.1152/jn.00532.2005
  13. Green JB, 1999, NEUROLOGY, V53, P736
  14. Dursun N, 2001, ARCH PHYS MED REHAB, V82, P1692, DOI 10.1053/apmr.2001.26253
  15. Brucker BS, 1996, ARCH PHYS MED REHAB, V77, P133, DOI 10.1016/S0003-9993(96)90157-4
  16. BRUCKER BS, 1980, BEHAVIORAL PSYCHOL R, P188
  17. COHEN LG, 1991, NEUROLOGY, V41, P1283
  18. Ding YM, 2005, CURR PHARM DESIGN, V11, P1441, DOI 10.2174/1381612053507855
  19. INGERSOLL C D, 1991, Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, V23, P1122
  20. Thurman DJ, 1995, GUIDELINES SURVEILLA

Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - FM/MOT
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - LIM/41