↓ Skip to main content

Electromyography Exposes Heterogeneity in Muscle Co-Contraction following Stroke

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
128 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Electromyography Exposes Heterogeneity in Muscle Co-Contraction following Stroke
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, December 2017
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2017.00699
Pubmed ID
Authors

Caitlin L. Banks, Helen J. Huang, Virginia L. Little, Carolynn Patten

Abstract

Walking after stroke is often described as requiring excessive muscle co-contraction, yet, evidence that co-contraction is a ubiquitous motor control strategy for this population remains inconclusive. Co-contraction, the simultaneous activation of agonist and antagonist muscles, can be assessed with electromyography (EMG) but is often described qualitatively. Here, our goal is to determine if co-contraction is associated with gait impairments following stroke. Fifteen individuals with chronic stroke and nine healthy controls walked on an instrumented treadmill at self-selected speed. Surface EMGs were collected from the medial gastrocnemius (MG), soleus (SOL), and tibialis anterior (TA) of each leg. EMG envelope amplitudes were assessed in three ways: (1) no normalization, (2) normalization to the maximum value across the gait cycle, or (3) normalization to maximal M-wave. Three co-contraction indices were calculated across each agonist/antagonist muscle pair (MG/TA and SOL/TA) to assess the effect of using various metrics to quantify co-contraction. Two factor ANOVAs were used to compare effects of group and normalization for each metric. Co-contraction during the terminal stance (TSt) phase of gait is not different between healthy controls and the paretic leg of individuals post-stroke, regardless of the metric used to quantify co-contraction. Interestingly, co-contraction was similar between M-max and non-normalized EMG; however, normalization does not impact the ability to resolve group differences. While a modest correlation is revealed between the amount of TSt co-contraction and walking speed, the relationship is not sufficiently strong to motivate further exploration of a causal link between co-contraction and walking function after stroke. Co-contraction does not appear to be a common strategy employed by individuals after stroke. We recommend exploration of alternative EMG analysis approaches in an effort to learn more about the causal mechanisms of gait impairment following stroke.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 128 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 23 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 10%
Researcher 11 9%
Student > Master 11 9%
Other 12 9%
Unknown 41 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 20 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 12%
Neuroscience 14 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 10%
Sports and Recreations 11 9%
Other 14 11%
Unknown 41 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 May 2023.
All research outputs
#14,547,101
of 23,734,501 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#5,718
of 12,641 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#235,941
of 444,375 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#83
of 206 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,734,501 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,641 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 444,375 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 206 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.