RESUMEN
Cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) leads to impaired trunk motor control, negatively impacting the performance of activities of daily living in the affected individuals. Improved trunk control with better sitting posture has been previously observed due to neuromuscular electrical stimulation and transcutaneous spinal stimulation, while improved postural stability has been observed with spinal cord epidural stimulation (scES). Hence, we studied how trunk-specific scES impacts sitting independence and posture. Fourteen individuals with chronic, severe cervical SCI with an implanted neurostimulator performed a 5-min tall-sit task without and with trunk-specific scES. Spine posture was assessed by placing markers on five spine levels and evaluating vertical spine inclination angles. Duration of trunk manual assistance was used to assess independence along with the number of independence changes and average independence score across those changes. With scES, the sacrum-L1 inclination and number of independence changes tended to decrease by 1.64 ± 3.16° (p = 0.07; Cohen's d = 0.53) and 9.86 ± 16.8 (p = 0.047; Cohen's d = 0.59), respectively. Additionally, for the participants who had poor sitting independence without scES, level of independence tended to increase by 12.91% [0%, 31.52%] (p = 0.38; Cohen's d = 0.96) when scES was present. Hence, trunk-specific scES promoted improvements in lower spine posture and lower levels of trunk assistance.
RESUMEN
Experimental motion capture studies have commonly considered the foot as a single rigid body even though the foot contains 26 bones and 30 joints. Various methods have been applied to study rigid body deviations of the foot. This study compared 3 methods: distal foot power (DFP), foot power imbalance (FPI), and a 2-segment foot model to study foot power and work in the takeoff phase of standing vertical jumps. Six physically active participants each performed 6 standing vertical jumps from a starting position spanning 2 adjacent force platforms to allow ground reaction forces acting on the foot to be divided at the metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joints. Shortly after movement initiation, DFP showed a power absorption phase followed by a power generation phase. FPI followed a similar pattern with smaller power absorption and a larger power generation compared to DFP. MTP joints primarily generated power in the 2-segment model. The net foot work was -4.0 (1.0) J using DFP, 1.8 (1.1) J using FPI, and 5.1 (0.5) J with MTP. The results suggest that MTP joints are only 1 source of foot power and that differences between DFP and FPI should be further explored in jumping and other movements.
