Methodological choices in muscle synergy analysis impact differentiation of physiological characteristics following stroke

Caitlin L. Banks, Mihir M. Pai, Theresa E. McGuirk, Benjamin J. Fregly, Carolynn Patten

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Muscle synergy analysis (MSA) is a mathematical technique that reduces the dimensionality of electromyographic (EMG) data. Used increasingly in biomechanics research,MSA requiresmethodological choices at each stage of the analysis. Differences in methodological steps affect the overall outcome, making it difficult to compare results across studies. We applied MSA to EMG data collected from individuals post-stroke identified as either responders (RES) or non-responders (nRES) on the basis of a critical post-treatment increase in walking speed. Importantly, no clinical or functional indicators identified differences between the cohort of RES and nRES at baseline. For this exploratory study, we selected the five highest RES and five lowest nRES available from a larger sample. Our goal was to assess how the methodological choices made before, during, and afterMSA affect the ability to differentiate two groups with intrinsic physiologic differences based on MSA results. We investigated 30 variations in MSA methodology to determine which choices allowed differentiation of RES from nRES at baseline. Trial-to-trial variability in time-independent synergy vectors (SVs) and time-varying neural commands (NCs) were measured as a function of: (1) number of synergies computed; (2) EMG normalizationmethod beforeMSA; (3) whether SVs were held constant across trials or allowed to vary duringMSA; and (4) synergy analysis output normalizationmethod after MSA. MSA methodology had a strong effect on our ability to differentiate RES from nRES at baseline. Across all 10 individuals and MSA variations, two synergies were needed to reach an average of 90%variance accounted for (VAF). Based on effect sizes, differences in SV and NC variability between groups were greatest using two synergies with SVs that varied from trial-to-trial. Differences in SV variability were clearest using unit magnitude per trial EMG normalization, while NC variability was less sensitive to EMG normalization method. No outcomes were greatly impacted by output normalization method. MSA variability for some, but not all, methods successfully differentiated intrinsic physiological differences inaccessible to traditional clinical or biomechanical assessments. Our results were sensitive to methodological choices, highlighting the need for disclosure of all aspects of MSA methodology in future studies.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number78
JournalFrontiers in Computational Neuroscience
Volume11
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 31 2017
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Stroke
Muscles
Aptitude
Disclosure
Biomechanical Phenomena
Research

Keywords

  • EMG
  • Locomotion
  • Motor modules
  • Muscle synergies
  • Stroke
  • Variability

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Neuroscience (miscellaneous)
  • Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience

Cite this

Methodological choices in muscle synergy analysis impact differentiation of physiological characteristics following stroke. / Banks, Caitlin L.; Pai, Mihir M.; McGuirk, Theresa E.; Fregly, Benjamin J.; Patten, Carolynn.

In: Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, Vol. 11, 78, 31.08.2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{16e28c1ce2d7440593096efb1a350d90,
title = "Methodological choices in muscle synergy analysis impact differentiation of physiological characteristics following stroke",
abstract = "Muscle synergy analysis (MSA) is a mathematical technique that reduces the dimensionality of electromyographic (EMG) data. Used increasingly in biomechanics research,MSA requiresmethodological choices at each stage of the analysis. Differences in methodological steps affect the overall outcome, making it difficult to compare results across studies. We applied MSA to EMG data collected from individuals post-stroke identified as either responders (RES) or non-responders (nRES) on the basis of a critical post-treatment increase in walking speed. Importantly, no clinical or functional indicators identified differences between the cohort of RES and nRES at baseline. For this exploratory study, we selected the five highest RES and five lowest nRES available from a larger sample. Our goal was to assess how the methodological choices made before, during, and afterMSA affect the ability to differentiate two groups with intrinsic physiologic differences based on MSA results. We investigated 30 variations in MSA methodology to determine which choices allowed differentiation of RES from nRES at baseline. Trial-to-trial variability in time-independent synergy vectors (SVs) and time-varying neural commands (NCs) were measured as a function of: (1) number of synergies computed; (2) EMG normalizationmethod beforeMSA; (3) whether SVs were held constant across trials or allowed to vary duringMSA; and (4) synergy analysis output normalizationmethod after MSA. MSA methodology had a strong effect on our ability to differentiate RES from nRES at baseline. Across all 10 individuals and MSA variations, two synergies were needed to reach an average of 90{\%}variance accounted for (VAF). Based on effect sizes, differences in SV and NC variability between groups were greatest using two synergies with SVs that varied from trial-to-trial. Differences in SV variability were clearest using unit magnitude per trial EMG normalization, while NC variability was less sensitive to EMG normalization method. No outcomes were greatly impacted by output normalization method. MSA variability for some, but not all, methods successfully differentiated intrinsic physiological differences inaccessible to traditional clinical or biomechanical assessments. Our results were sensitive to methodological choices, highlighting the need for disclosure of all aspects of MSA methodology in future studies.",
keywords = "EMG, Locomotion, Motor modules, Muscle synergies, Stroke, Variability",
author = "Banks, {Caitlin L.} and Pai, {Mihir M.} and McGuirk, {Theresa E.} and Fregly, {Benjamin J.} and Carolynn Patten",
year = "2017",
month = "8",
day = "31",
doi = "10.3389/fncom.2017.00078",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "11",
journal = "Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience",
issn = "1662-5188",
publisher = "Frontiers Research Foundation",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Methodological choices in muscle synergy analysis impact differentiation of physiological characteristics following stroke

AU - Banks, Caitlin L.

AU - Pai, Mihir M.

AU - McGuirk, Theresa E.

AU - Fregly, Benjamin J.

AU - Patten, Carolynn

PY - 2017/8/31

Y1 - 2017/8/31

N2 - Muscle synergy analysis (MSA) is a mathematical technique that reduces the dimensionality of electromyographic (EMG) data. Used increasingly in biomechanics research,MSA requiresmethodological choices at each stage of the analysis. Differences in methodological steps affect the overall outcome, making it difficult to compare results across studies. We applied MSA to EMG data collected from individuals post-stroke identified as either responders (RES) or non-responders (nRES) on the basis of a critical post-treatment increase in walking speed. Importantly, no clinical or functional indicators identified differences between the cohort of RES and nRES at baseline. For this exploratory study, we selected the five highest RES and five lowest nRES available from a larger sample. Our goal was to assess how the methodological choices made before, during, and afterMSA affect the ability to differentiate two groups with intrinsic physiologic differences based on MSA results. We investigated 30 variations in MSA methodology to determine which choices allowed differentiation of RES from nRES at baseline. Trial-to-trial variability in time-independent synergy vectors (SVs) and time-varying neural commands (NCs) were measured as a function of: (1) number of synergies computed; (2) EMG normalizationmethod beforeMSA; (3) whether SVs were held constant across trials or allowed to vary duringMSA; and (4) synergy analysis output normalizationmethod after MSA. MSA methodology had a strong effect on our ability to differentiate RES from nRES at baseline. Across all 10 individuals and MSA variations, two synergies were needed to reach an average of 90%variance accounted for (VAF). Based on effect sizes, differences in SV and NC variability between groups were greatest using two synergies with SVs that varied from trial-to-trial. Differences in SV variability were clearest using unit magnitude per trial EMG normalization, while NC variability was less sensitive to EMG normalization method. No outcomes were greatly impacted by output normalization method. MSA variability for some, but not all, methods successfully differentiated intrinsic physiological differences inaccessible to traditional clinical or biomechanical assessments. Our results were sensitive to methodological choices, highlighting the need for disclosure of all aspects of MSA methodology in future studies.

AB - Muscle synergy analysis (MSA) is a mathematical technique that reduces the dimensionality of electromyographic (EMG) data. Used increasingly in biomechanics research,MSA requiresmethodological choices at each stage of the analysis. Differences in methodological steps affect the overall outcome, making it difficult to compare results across studies. We applied MSA to EMG data collected from individuals post-stroke identified as either responders (RES) or non-responders (nRES) on the basis of a critical post-treatment increase in walking speed. Importantly, no clinical or functional indicators identified differences between the cohort of RES and nRES at baseline. For this exploratory study, we selected the five highest RES and five lowest nRES available from a larger sample. Our goal was to assess how the methodological choices made before, during, and afterMSA affect the ability to differentiate two groups with intrinsic physiologic differences based on MSA results. We investigated 30 variations in MSA methodology to determine which choices allowed differentiation of RES from nRES at baseline. Trial-to-trial variability in time-independent synergy vectors (SVs) and time-varying neural commands (NCs) were measured as a function of: (1) number of synergies computed; (2) EMG normalizationmethod beforeMSA; (3) whether SVs were held constant across trials or allowed to vary duringMSA; and (4) synergy analysis output normalizationmethod after MSA. MSA methodology had a strong effect on our ability to differentiate RES from nRES at baseline. Across all 10 individuals and MSA variations, two synergies were needed to reach an average of 90%variance accounted for (VAF). Based on effect sizes, differences in SV and NC variability between groups were greatest using two synergies with SVs that varied from trial-to-trial. Differences in SV variability were clearest using unit magnitude per trial EMG normalization, while NC variability was less sensitive to EMG normalization method. No outcomes were greatly impacted by output normalization method. MSA variability for some, but not all, methods successfully differentiated intrinsic physiological differences inaccessible to traditional clinical or biomechanical assessments. Our results were sensitive to methodological choices, highlighting the need for disclosure of all aspects of MSA methodology in future studies.

KW - EMG

KW - Locomotion

KW - Motor modules

KW - Muscle synergies

KW - Stroke

KW - Variability

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85032007176&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85032007176&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3389/fncom.2017.00078

DO - 10.3389/fncom.2017.00078

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85032007176

VL - 11

JO - Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience

JF - Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience

SN - 1662-5188

M1 - 78

ER -