Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Ankle dexterity is less impaired than muscle strength in incomplete spinal cord lesion

  • ORIGINAL COMMUNICATION
  • Published:
Journal of Neurology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Motor assessment after incomplete spinal cord injury (iSCI) currently consists of tests for muscle strength (manual muscle testing) and gait. The ability to adequately time a movement, an aspect of dexterity, is not tested. Thus, this study assessed the timing of ankle dorsiflexion in iSCI patients in the supine position and during gait and examined its relation to measures for muscle strength, corticospinal conductivity and gait speed.

Methods

In 12 subjects with iSCI and 12 matched controls, timing of ankle dorsiflexion was tested by means of auditory-paced dorsiand plantar-flexion movements at three frequencies in the supine position and by determining initiation and termination of dorsiflexion in swing during gait. In addition, maximal movement velocity (MMV) in the ankle task, maximal voluntary contraction (MVC), corticospinal conductivity (motor evoked potentials (MEP)) and gait speed (10 Meter Walk Test) were assessed.

Results

The groups did not significantly differ in timing of ankle dorsiflexion, neither in the supine position nor in gait. However, they significantly differed in MMV at all frequencies, MEP latency, MEP amplitude and gait speed. In contrast to ankle timing in the supine position, the onset of dorsiflexion in swing during gait significantly correlated to the dynamic MEP parameters.

Conclusions

Although MMV and gait speed were significantly reduced, timing of ankle dorsiflexion, both in the supine position and during gait,was less impaired in iSCI patients. This indicates that the loss of strength, particularly of dynamic strength, is the major motor impairment in iSCI, which might be considered when assessing treatment interventions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ada L, O'Dwyer N, Green J, Yeo W, Neilson P (1996) The nature of the loss of strength and dexterity in the upper limb following stroke. Hum Mov Sci 15:671–687

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. American Spinal Injury Association (2002) International Standards for Neurological and Functional Classification of Spinal Cord Injury, Chicago

  3. Aschersleben G, Prinz G (1995) Synchronizing actions with events: The role of sensory information. Percept Psychophys 57:305–317

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Beloozerova, IN, Sirota MG, Swadlow HA (2003) Activity of different classes of neurons of the motor cortex during locomotion. J Neurosci 23:1087–1097

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Butt S, Kiehn O (2003) Functional identification of interneurons responsible for left-right coordination of hindlimbs in mammals. Neuron 38:953–963

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Canning C, Ada L, O'Dwyer N (1999) Slowness to develop force contributes to weakness after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 80:66–70

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Canning CG, Ada L, O'Dwyer N (2000) Abnormal muscle activation characteristics associated with loss of dexterity after stroke. J Neurol Sci 176:45–56

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Canning CG, Ada L, Adams R, O'Dwyer N (2004) Loss of strength contributes more to physical disability after stroke than loss of dexterity. Clin Rehabil 18:300–308

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Catz A, Itzkovich M, Agranov E, Ring H, Tamir A (2001) The spinal cord independence measure (SCIM): Sensitivity to functional changes in subgroups of spinal cord lesion patients. Spinal Cord 39:97–100

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Chen G, Patten C, Kothari D, Zajac F (2005) Gait differences between individuals with post-stroke hemiparesis and non-disabled controls at matched speeds. Gait Posture 22:51–56

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Courtine G, Roy R, Raven J, Hodgson J, Mckay H, Yang H, Zhong H, Tuszynski M, Edgerton (2005) Performance of locomotion and foot grasping following a unilateral thoracic corticospinal tract lesion in monkeys. Brain 128:2338–2358

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Curt A, Keck ME, Dietz V (1998) Functional outcome following spinal cord injury: significance of motor-evoked potentials and ASIA scores. Arch Phys Med Rehab 79:81–86

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Den Otter A, Geurts A, Mulder Th, Duysens J (2006) Gait recovery is not associated with changes in the temporal patterning of muscle activity during treadmill walking in patients with post-stroke hemiparesis. Clin Neurophysiol 117:4–15

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Diehl P, Kliesch U, Dietz V, Curt A (2006) Impaired facilitation of motor evoked potentials in incomplete spinal cord injury. J Neurol 253:51–57

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Dietz V (1992) Human neuronal control of automatic functional movements: Interaction between central programs and afferent input. Physiol Rev 72:33–69

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Ditunno JF, Ditunno PL, Graziani V, Bernardi M, Castellano V, Marchetti M, Barbeau H, Frankel HL, D'Andrea JM, Ko H-Y, Marshall R, Nance P (2000) Walking index for spinal cord injury (WISCI): an international multicenter validity and reliability study. Spinal Cord 38:234–243

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ditunno PL and Ditunno JF (2001) Walking index for spinal cord injury (WISCI II): scale revision. Spinal Cord 39:654–656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Dobkin B, Firestine A, West M, Saremi K, Woods R (2004) Ankle dorsiflexion as an fMRI paradigm to assay motor control of walking during rehabilitation. Neuroimage 23:370–381

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Dobkin B, Apple D, Barbeau H, Basso M, Behrmann A, Deforge D, Ditunno J, Dudley G, Elashoff R, Fugate L, Harkema S, Saulino M, Scott M (2006) Weight-supported treadmill vs overground training for walking after acute incomplete SCI. Neurology 66:484–493

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Drew T, Jiang W, Widajewicz W (2002) Contributions of the motor cortex to the control of the hindlimbs during locomotion in the cat. Brain Res Brain Res Rev 40:178–191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Gladstone D, Danells C, Black S (2002) The Fugl-Meyer Assessment of motor recovery after stroke: a critical review of its measurement properties. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 16:232–240

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Grillner S, Ekeberg O, El Manira A, Lansner A, Parker D, Tegner J, Wallen P (1998) Intrinsic function of a neuronal network – a vertebrate central pattern generator. Brain Res Rev 26:184–197

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Gutierrez G, Chow J, Tillman M, McCoy S, Castellano V, White L (2005) Resistance training improves gait kinematics in persons with multiple sclerosis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 86:1824–1829

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Hsu A, Tang P, Jan M (2002) Test-retest reliability of isokinetic muscle strength of the lower extremities in patients with stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 83:1130–1137

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Jayaraman A, Gregory CM, Bowden M, Stevens JE, Shah P, Behrmann AL, Vandenborne K (2006) Lower extremity skeletal muscle function in persons with incomplete spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord 44:680–687

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Kemoun G, Thoumie P, Boisson D, Guieu D (2002) Ankle dorsiflexion delay can predict falls in the elderly. J Rehabil Med 34:278–283

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Krawetz P, Nance P (1996) Gait analysis of spinal cord injured subjects: effects of injury level and spasticity. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 77:635–638

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Lavoie S, Drew T (2002) Discharge characteristics of neurons in the red nucleus during voluntary gait modifications: a comparison with the motor cortex. J Neurophysiol 88:1791–1814

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Miller T, Claiborne Johnston S (2005) Should the Babinski sign be part of the routine neurologic examination? Neurology 65:1165–1168

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Riley PO, Paolini G, Croce UD, Paylo KW, Kerrigan DC (2007) A kinematic and kinetic comparison of overground and treadmill walking in healthy subjects. Gait Posture 26:17–24

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Schubert M, Curt A, Jensen L, Dietz V (1997) Corticospinal input in human gait: modulation of magnetically evoked motor responses. Exp Brain Res 115:234–246

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Schubert M, Curt A, Colombo G, Berger W, Dietz V (1999) Voluntary control of human gait: conditioning of magnetically evoked motor responses in a precision stepping task. Exp Brain Res 126:583–588

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Van Hedel H, Wirz M, Dietz V (2005) Assessing walking ability in subjects with spinal cord injury: validity and reliability of 3 walking tests. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 86:190–196

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Van Hedel H, Wirz M, Curt A (2006) Improving walking assessment in subjects with a spinal cord injury: responsiveness. Spinal Cord 44:352–356

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Van Hedel HJ, Tomatis L, Müller R (2006) Modulation of leg muscle activity and gait kinematics by walking speed and bodyweight unloading. Gait and Posture 24:35–45

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Van Hedel H, Murer C, Dietz V, Curt A (2007) The amplitude of lower leg motor evoked potentials is a reliable measure when controlled for torque and motor task. J Neurol 254:1089–1098

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Waters RL, Adkins RH, Yakura JS, Sie I (1994) Motor and sensory recovery following incomplete paraplegia. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 75:67–72

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Wirth B, van Hedel H, Curt A (2007) Foot control in incomplete SCI: distinction between paresis and dexterity. Still in press

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Spinal Cord Injury Center, Balgrist University Hospital, Forchstrasse 340, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland

    B. Wirth & H. J. A. van Hedel

  2. Institute of Human Movement Sciences and Sport, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, 8092, Zurich, Switzerland

    B. Wirth

  3. ICORD and Division of Neurology, University of British Columbia, 2469-6270 University Blvd, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada

    A. Curt

Authors
  1. B. Wirth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. H. J. A. van Hedel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. Curt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to B. Wirth.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wirth, B., van Hedel, H.J.A. & Curt, A. Ankle dexterity is less impaired than muscle strength in incomplete spinal cord lesion. J Neurol 255, 273–279 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-008-0724-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-008-0724-y

Key words

Search

Navigation