Determining Appropriate Models for Joint Control Using Surface Electrical Stimulation of Soleus in Spinal Cord Injury

Overview

Journal Med Biol Eng Comput

Publisher Springer

Specialties Biomedical Engineering
Medical Informatics

Date 1994 May 1

PMID 7934250

Citations 2

Authors

B Flaherty

C Robinson

G Agarwal

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The mechanical impedance of the ankle joint during electrical stimulation of the soleus is studied by applying constant-velocity 10 degrees angular perturbations to the ankle and measuring the resultant torque. Both neurologically intact subjects and spinal cord injured subjects are tested. Lumped, piecewise linear models are developed to predict the torque from the measured displacement and acceleration signals. The commonly used second-order mass-spring-dashpot model fails to predict the changes in torque that occur following imposed movements. A five-element, directionally-dependent piecewise linear model is much better at predicting the measured responses for velocities up to 50 degrees s-1. Numerical least squared error identification techniques are used to estimate the model parameters for three neurologically intact and three spinal cord injured subjects. The average error between the model's response and the measured response across all subjects is 10.9%. There is some evidence that a velocity-dependent non-linear model could produce better results than the directionally-dependent piecewise linear model.

Citing Articles

Biomechanical and reflex responses to joint perturbations during electrical stimulation of muscle: instrumentation and measurement techniques.

Robinson C, Flaherty B, Fehr L, Agarwal G, Harris G, Gottlieb G Med Biol Eng Comput. 1994; 32(3):261-72.

PMID: 7934249 DOI: 10.1007/BF02512521.

Identification of nonlinear model of ankle joint dynamics during electrical stimulation of soleus.

Flaherty B, Robinson C, Agarwal G Med Biol Eng Comput. 1995; 33(3 Spec No):430-9.

PMID: 7666691 DOI: 10.1007/BF02510527.

References

Cybulski G, Penn R, Jaeger R . Lower extremity functional neuromuscular stimulation in cases of spinal cord injury. Neurosurgery. 1984; 15(1):132-46. DOI: 10.1227/00006123-198407000-00027. View

Vodovnik L, CROCHETIERE W, RESWICK J . Control of a skeletal joint by electrical stimulation of antagonists. Med Biol Eng. 1967; 5(2):97-109. DOI: 10.1007/BF02474498. View

Baratta R, Zhou B, Solomonow M . Frequency response model of skeletal muscle: effect of perturbation level, and control strategy. Med Biol Eng Comput. 1989; 27(4):337-45. DOI: 10.1007/BF02441424. View

Allin J, Inbar G . FNS control schemes for the upper limb. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1986; 33(9):818-28. DOI: 10.1109/TBME.1986.325775. View

Hannaford B . A nonlinear model of the phasic dynamics of muscle activation. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1990; 37(11):1067-75. DOI: 10.1109/10.61032. View

Agarwal G, Gottlieb G . Mathematical modeling and simulation of the postural control loop--Part II. Crit Rev Biomed Eng. 1984; 11(2):113-54. View

Jaeger R . Design and simulation of closed-loop electrical stimulation orthoses for restoration of quiet standing in paraplegia. J Biomech. 1986; 19(10):825-35. DOI: 10.1016/0021-9290(86)90133-8. View

Weiss P, Kearney R, Hunter I . Position dependence of ankle joint dynamics--I. Passive mechanics. J Biomech. 1986; 19(9):727-35. DOI: 10.1016/0021-9290(86)90196-x. View

Gottlieb G, Agarwal G . Dynamic relationship between isometric muscle tension and the electromyogram in man. J Appl Physiol. 1971; 30(3):345-51. DOI: 10.1152/jappl.1971.30.3.345. View

10.

Crago P, Chizeck H, Neuman M, HAMBRECHT F . Sensors for use with functional neuromuscular stimulation. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1986; 33(2):256-68. DOI: 10.1109/TBME.1986.325808. View

11.

Robinson C, Flaherty B, Fehr L, Agarwal G, Harris G, Gottlieb G . Biomechanical and reflex responses to joint perturbations during electrical stimulation of muscle: instrumentation and measurement techniques. Med Biol Eng Comput. 1994; 32(3):261-72. DOI: 10.1007/BF02512521. View

12.

Gottlieb G, Agarwal G . Response to sudden torques about ankle in man: myotatic reflex. J Neurophysiol. 1979; 42(1 Pt 1):91-106. DOI: 10.1152/jn.1979.42.1.91. View

13.

Liberson W, HOLMQUEST H, SCOT D, Dow M . Functional electrotherapy: stimulation of the peroneal nerve synchronized with the swing phase of the gait of hemiplegic patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1961; 42:101-5. View

14.

Sinkjaer T, Toft E, Andreassen S, Hornemann B . Muscle stiffness in human ankle dorsiflexors: intrinsic and reflex components. J Neurophysiol. 1988; 60(3):1110-21. DOI: 10.1152/jn.1988.60.3.1110. View

15.

Katz B . The relation between force and speed in muscular contraction. J Physiol. 1939; 96(1):45-64. PMC: 1393840. DOI: 10.1113/jphysiol.1939.sp003756. View

16.

RACK P, Ross H, Thilmann A . The ankle stretch reflexes in normal and spastic subjects. The response to sinusoidal movement. Brain. 1984; 107 ( Pt 2):637-54. DOI: 10.1093/brain/107.2.637. View

17.

Veltink P, Chizeck H, Crago P . Nonlinear joint angle control for artificially stimulated muscle. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1992; 39(4):368-80. DOI: 10.1109/10.126609. View

18.

Baratta R, Solomonow M . The dynamic response model of nine different skeletal muscles. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1990; 37(3):243-51. DOI: 10.1109/10.52326. View

19.

Agarwal G, Gottlieb G . Mathematical modeling and simulation of the postural control loop: Part I. Crit Rev Biomed Eng. 1982; 8(2):93-134. View

20.

Weiss P, Hunter I, Kearney R . Human ankle joint stiffness over the full range of muscle activation levels. J Biomech. 1988; 21(7):539-44. DOI: 10.1016/0021-9290(88)90217-5. View