Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 234, Issue 7, pp 1903–1914 | Cite as

Coordination of muscles to control the footpath during over-ground walking in neurologically intact individuals and stroke survivors

  • Shraddha Srivastava
  • Pei-Chun Kao
  • Darcy S. Reisman
  • Jill S. Higginson
  • John P. Scholz
Research Article


The central nervous system (CNS) is believed to use the abundant degrees of freedom of muscles and joints to stabilize a particular task variable important for task success, such as footpath during walking. Stroke survivors often demonstrate impaired balance and high incidences of falls due to increased footpath variability during walking. In the current study, we use the uncontrolled manifold (UCM) approach to investigate the role of motor abundance in stabilizing footpath during swing phase in healthy individuals and stroke survivors. Twelve stroke survivors and their age- and gender-matched controls walked over-ground at self-selected speed, while electromyographic and kinematic data were collected. UCM analysis partitioned the variance of muscle groups (modes) across gait cycles into “good variance” (i.e., muscle mode variance leading to a consistent or stable footpath) or “bad variance” (i.e., muscle mode variance resulting in an inconsistent footpath). Both groups had a significantly greater “good” than “bad” variance, suggesting that footpath is an important task variable stabilized by the CNS during walking. The relative variance difference that reflects normalized difference between “good” and “bad” variance was not significantly different between groups. However, significant differences in muscle mode structure and muscle mode activation timing were observed between the two groups. Our results suggest that though the mode structure and activation timing are altered, stroke survivors may retain their ability to explore the redundancy within the neuromotor system and utilize it to stabilize the footpath.


Stroke Locomotion Footpath variability Uncontrolled manifold hypothesis 



The authors would like to thank the Delaware Rehabilitation Institute (DRI) research core in helping with recruitment, scheduling, and clinical evaluations of the subjects.


This work was supported by Grant R01HD038582 from the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

We have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Ethical standard

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.


  1. Balasubramanian CK, Neptune RR, Kautz SA (2009) Variability in spatiotemporal step characteristics and its relationship to walking performance post-stroke. Gait Posture 29:408–414CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Bauby CE, Kuo AD (2000) Active control of lateral balance in human walking. J Biomech 33:1433–1440CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Begg R, Best R, Dell’Oro L, Taylor S (2007) Minimum foot clearance during walking: strategies for the minimisation of trip-related falls. Gait Posture 25:191–198CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bernstein NA (1967) The co-ordination and regulation of movements. Pergamon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  5. Black DP, Smith BA, Wu J, Ulrich BD (2007) Uncontrolled manifold analysis of segmental angle variability during walking: preadolescents with and without Down syndrome. Exp Brain Res 183:511–521CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Cirstea M, Levin MF (2000) Compensatory strategies for reaching in stroke. Brain 123:940–953CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Clark DJ, Ting LH, Zajac FE, Neptune RR, Kautz SA (2010) Merging of healthy motor modules predicts reduced locomotor performance and muscle coordination complexity post-stroke. J Neurophysiol 103:844–857CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Cockrell JR, Folstein MF (2002) Mini-mental state examination. Geriatr Psychiatry 140Google Scholar
  9. Coscia M, Monaco V, Martelloni C, Rossi B, Chisari C, Micera S (2015) Muscle synergies and spinal maps are sensitive to the asymmetry induced by a unilateral stroke. J Neuroeng Rehabil 12:39CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Danna-dos-Santos A, Slomka K, Zatsiorsky VM, Latash ML (2007) Muscle modes and synergies during voluntary body sway. Exp Brain Res 179:533–550CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. De Freitas SMSF, Scholz JP, Stehman AJ (2007) Effect of motor planning on use of motor abundance. Neurosci Lett 417:66–71CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Freitas SMSF, Gera G, Scholz JP (2011) Timing variability of reach trajectories in left versus right hemisphere stroke. Brain Res 1419:19–33CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. Gelfand I, Tsetlin M (1966) On mathematical modeling of the mechanisms of the central nervous system. In: Models of the structural-functional organization of certain biological systems. Moscow Nauka (in Russian, published in English in 1971 by Cambridge MA: MIT Press), pp 9–26Google Scholar
  14. Gera G, Freitas S, Latash M, Monahan K, Schoner G, Scholz J (2010) Motor abundance contributes to resolving multiple kinematic task constraints. Mot Control 14:83–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Grasso R, Bianchi L, Lacquaniti F (1998) Motor patterns for human gait: backward versus forward locomotion. J Neurophysiol 80:1868–1885CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Grasso R, Ivanenko YP, Zago M et al (2004) Distributed plasticity of locomotor pattern generators in spinal cord injured patients. Brain 127:1019–1034. doi: 10.1093/brain/awh115 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Ivanenko Y, Grasso R, Macellari V, Lacquaniti F (2002) Control of foot trajectory in human locomotion: role of ground contact forces in simulated reduced gravity. J Neurophysiol 87:3070–3089CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Ivanenko Y, Poppele R, Lacquaniti F (2009) Distributed neural networks for controlling human locomotion: lessons from normal and SCI subjects. Brain Res Bull 78:13–21CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Krishnamoorthy V, Latash ML, Scholz JP, Zatsiorsky VM (2003) Muscle synergies during shifts of the center of pressure by standing persons. Exp Brain Res 152:281–292CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Krishnamoorthy V, Latash ML, Scholz JP, Zatsiorsky VM (2004) Muscle modes during shifts of the center of pressure by standing persons: effect of instability and additional support. Exp Brain Res 157:18–31CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Krishnan C, Ranganathan R, Kantak SS, Dhaher YY, Rymer WZ (2012) Active robotic training improves locomotor function in a stroke survivor. J Neuroeng Rehabil 9:57CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. Krishnan C, Kotsapouikis D, Dhaher YY, Rymer WZ (2013a) Reducing robotic guidance during robot-assisted gait training improves gait function: a case report on a stroke survivor. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 94:1202–1206CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Krishnan V, Rosenblatt NJ, Latash ML, Grabiner MD (2013b) The effects of age on stabilization of the mediolateral trajectory of the swing foot. Gait Posture 38:923–928CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Kutch JJ, Valero-Cuevas FJ (2012) Challenges and new approaches to proving the existence of muscle synergies of neural origin. PLoS Comput Biol 8:e1002434CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. Latash ML, Gorniak S, Zatsiorsky VM (2008) Hierarchies of synergies in human movements. Kinesiology 40:29PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Papi E, Rowe PJ, Pomeroy VM (2015) Analysis of gait within the uncontrolled manifold hypothesis: stabilisation of the centre of mass during gait. J Biomech 48:324–331CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Pohl PS, Duncan PW, Perera S, Liu W, Lai SM, Studenski S, Long J (2002) Influence of stroke-related impairments on performance in 6-minute walk test. J Rehabil Res Dev 39:439–444PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Ranganathan R, Krishnan C (2012) Extracting synergies in gait: using EMG variability to evaluate control strategies. J Neurophysiol 108:1537–1544CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. Reisman DS, Scholz JP (2003) Aspects of joint coordination are preserved during pointing in persons with post-stroke hemiparesis. Brain 126:2510–2527CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Scholz JP, Schoner G (1999) The uncontrolled manifold concept: identifying control variables for a functional task. Exp Brain Res 126:289–306CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Srivastava S, Kao PC, Kim SH et al (2014) Assist-as-needed robot-aided gait training improves walking function in individuals following stroke. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil EngGoogle Scholar
  32. Ting LH, Macpherson JM (2005) A limited set of muscle synergies for force control during a postural task. J Neurophysiol 93:609–613CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Tresch MC, Cheung VC, d’Avella A (2006) Matrix factorization algorithms for the identification of muscle synergies: evaluation on simulated and experimental data sets. J Neurophysiol 95:2199–2212CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Tropea P, Monaco V, Coscia M, Posteraro F, Micera S (2013) Effects of early and intensive neuro-rehabilitative treatment on muscle synergies in acute post-stroke patients: a pilot study. J Neuroeng Rehabil 10:0003–0010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tseng Y-W, Scholz JP, Schöner G, Hotchkiss L (2003) Effect of accuracy constraint on joint coordination during pointing movements. Exp Brain Res 149:276–288CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Wang Y, Zatsiorsky VM, Latash ML (2006) Muscle synergies involved in preparation to a step made under the self-paced and reaction time instructions. Clin Neurophysiol 117:41–56CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Winter DA (1992) Foot trajectory in human gait: a precise and multifactorial motor control task. Phys Ther 72:45–53 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shraddha Srivastava
    • 1
  • Pei-Chun Kao
    • 2
  • Darcy S. Reisman
    • 3
  • Jill S. Higginson
    • 4
  • John P. Scholz
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Health Sciences and Research, College of Health ProfessionsMedical University of South CarolinaCharlestonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Physical TherapyUniversity of Massachusetts LowellLowellUSA
  3. 3.Department of Physical TherapyUniversity of DelawareNewarkUSA
  4. 4.Department of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of DelawareNewarkUSA

Personalised recommendations