Back

Task-dependent Alteration in Delta Band Corticomuscular Coherence during Standing in Chronic Stroke Survivors

kukkar, K. K.; Rao, N.; Huynh, D.; Shah, S.; Contreras-Vidal, J. L.; Parikh, P. J.

2023-07-23 rehabilitation medicine and physical therapy
10.1101/2023.07.17.23292472 medRxiv
Show abstract

Balance control is an important indicator of mobility and independence in activities of daily living. How the changes in functional integrity of corticospinal tract due to stroke affects the maintenance of upright stance remains to be known. We investigated the changes in functional coupling between the cortex and lower limb muscles during a challenging balance task over multiple frequency bands in chronic stroke survivors. Eleven stroke patients and nine healthy controls performed a challenging balance task. They stood on a computerized platform with/without somatosensory input distortion created by sway-referencing the support surface, thereby varying the difficulty levels of the task. We computed corticomuscular coherence between Cz (electroencephalography) and leg muscles and assessed balance performance using Berg Balance scale (BBS), Timed-up and go (TUG) and center of pressure (COP) measures. We found lower delta frequency band coherence in stroke patients when compared with healthy controls under medium difficulty condition for distal but not proximal leg muscles. For both groups, we found similar coherence at other frequency bands. On BBS and TUG, stroke patients showed poor balance. However, similar group differences were not consistently observed across COP measures. The presence of distal versus proximal effect suggests differences in the (re)organization of the corticospinal connections across the two muscles groups for balance control. We argue that the observed group difference in the delta coherence might be due to altered mechanisms for the detection of somatosensory modulation resulting from sway-referencing of the support platform for balance control.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.