Short-term effect of electrical nerve stimulation on spinal reciprocal inhibition during robot-assisted passive stepping in humans.
Short-term effect of electrical nerve stimulation on spinal reciprocal inhibition during robot-assisted passive stepping in humans.
复制标题
机器人辅助被动行走过程中神经电刺激对脊柱相互抑制的短期影响。
DOI：
10.1111/ejn.13000
复制
发表时间：
2015
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
Nakazawa K
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Obata H;Ogawa T;Kitamura;Masugi Y;Takahashi M;Kawashima N;Nakazawa K
本研究旨在研究电刺激腓总神经（CPN）对健康受试者机器人辅助被动地面踏步（PGS）过程中脊髓反射和相互抑制（RI）的影响。在健康受试者中应用五种干预30分钟：单独PGS;单独强CPN刺激[最大胫骨前肌（TA）M波的50%，功能性电刺激（FES）];单独弱CPN刺激[刚好高于TA肌肉的MT，治疗性电刺激（TES）]; PGS + FES; PGS + TES。以25 Hz间歇性地向CPN施加FES和TES。在每次干预前（基线）和干预后5、15和30 min，研究比目鱼肌（Sol）H-反射和RI（通过CPN刺激调节Sol H-反射进行评估）。与基线值相比，每次干预后Sol H-反射的振幅无显著差异。与基础值相比，FES PGS后5 min RI显著降低，而TES PGS后5和15 min RI显著升高。其他干预措施不影响RI的量。这些结果表明，结合PGS和CPN刺激的干预措施以强度依赖性方式改变了脊髓RI。
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of electrical stimulation to the common peroneal nerve (CPN) on the spinal reflex and reciprocal inhibition (RI) during robot‐assisted passive ground stepping (PGS) in healthy subjects. Five interventions were applied for 30 min in healthy subjects: PGS alone; strong CPN stimulation [50% of the maximal tibialis anterior (TA) M‐wave, functional electrical stimulation (FES)] alone; weak CPN stimulation [just above the MT for the TA muscle, therapeutic electrical stimulation (TES)] alone; PGS with FES; and PGS with TES. FES and TES were applied intermittently to the CPN at 25 Hz. The soleus (Sol) H‐reflex and RI, which was assessed by conditioning the Sol H‐reflex with CPN stimulation, were investigated before (baseline), and 5, 15 and 30 min after each intervention. The amplitudes of the Sol H‐reflex were not significantly different after each intervention as compared with the baseline values. The amounts of RI were significantly decreased 5 min after PGS with FES as compared with the baseline values, whereas they were significantly increased 5 and 15 min after PGS with TES. The other interventions did not affect the amount of RI. These results suggest that interventions that combined PGS with CPN stimulation changed the spinal RI in an intensity‐dependent manner.