脑卒中患者下肢肌肉动态运动负荷下表面肌电信号特征研究

关键词：脑卒中  下肢肌肉  动态运动负荷  表面肌电图

Keywords:stroke  limb muscle  dynamic contraction  surface EMG

摘要：

      目的：观察动态运动负荷对脑卒中患者下肢肌肉表面肌电信号变化的影响，探讨在动态运动负荷下脑卒中患者下肢肌肉表面肌电信号特征。方法：11例脑卒中患者和14例正常人(对照组)参加本实验研究，利用动态运动负荷诱发双侧下肢屈伸膝关节，采用表面电极引导和记录肌电信号并进行线性时、频分析。结果：两组各活动肢体间比较除AEMG斜率均值外MF、MPF、AEMG及Mf斜率及MPF斜率均值差异无显著性意义；各活动肌肉间比较MF、MPF、AEMG均值差异有显著性意义，而Mf斜率、MPF斜率及AEMG斜率均值无显著性差异；活动肢体因素四个水平间比较除偏瘫组患侧与健侧之间的MF和AEMG、AEMG斜率均值和偏瘫组患侧与正常组左侧的MPF斜率均值有显著性差异外,其余参数在偏瘫组与正常组组内、组间的差异无显著性差异；活动肌肉因素4组肌肉间对比：主动肌与拮抗肌以及协同肌AEMG、MPF差异有显著性，协同肌之间MF、MPF差异有非常显著性，拮抗肌与协同肌差异无显著性。结论：采用快速傅立叶变换方法进行线性功率谱分析和平均肌电值及疲劳试验分析并不能很好地反映动态运动负荷下脑卒中患者下肢肌肉表面肌电信号变化，特别是活动肢体因素，原因尚待深入研究。

Abstract:

      Objective：To explore the characters of surface myoelectric signals of stroke patients′ lower limb muscles contracting dynamically. Method： Eleven stroke patients and 14 health individuals were compared. All the subjects had to perform dynamic contraction for knee flexion and extension. The surface myoelectric signals were collected by surface electrodes and then processed by linear time-and frequency-domain method. Result： There was no significant difference about the value of MF, MPF, AEMG, MF slope and MPF slope expect AEMG slope among the motion limbs. There were very significant differences about the values of MP, MPF and AEMG among the motion muscles, but there was no significant difference about the singals of MF slope, MPF slope and AEMG slope. In patients group there were significant differences about the values of MF, AEMG, AEMG slope of motion limb between paretic side and non-paretic side. There were also significant differences about the values of MPF slope between paretic side of the patients and left side of the health. But there was no significant difference about other parameters in groups or among groups. Compared the activity muscles of four groups, there were significant difference about the values of AEMG and MPF among initiative muscles, antagonistic muscles and co-contraction muscles. There were very significant differences about the values of MF and MPF among co-contraction muscles, but there was no significant difference between initiative muscle and antagonistic muscle. Conclusion：The method of analyzing linearity power chart and AEMG and Fatigue test with fast fourier transform could not well reflect the changes characters of surface myoelectric signals of the lower limb muscles contracting dynamically.