Novel muscle patterns for reaching after cervical spinal cord injury: a case for motor redundancy

Abstract

A fundamental issue in the neuromotor control of arm movements is whether the nervous system can use distinctly different muscle activity patterns to obtain similar kinematic outcomes. Although computer simulations have demonstrated several possible mechanical and torque solutions, there is little empirical evidence that the nervous system actually employs fundamentally different muscle patterns for the same movement, such as activating a muscle one time and not the next, or switching from a flexor to an extensor. Under typical conditions, subjects choose the same muscles for any given movement, which suggests that in order to see the capacity of the nervous system to make a different choice of muscles, the nervous system must be pushed beyond the normal circumstances. The purpose of this study, then, was to examine an atypical condition, reaching of cervical spinal cord injured (SCI) subjects who have a reduced repertoire of available distal arm muscles but otherwise a normal nervous system above the level of lesion. Electromyography and kinematics of the shoulder and elbow were examined in the SCI subjects performing a center-out task and then compared to neurologically normal control subjects. The findings showed that the SCI-injured subjects produced reaches with typical global kinematic features, such as straight finger paths, bell-shaped velocities, and joint excursions similar to control subjects. The SCI subjects, however, activated only the shoulder agonist muscle for all directions, unlike the control pattern that involved a reciprocal pattern at each joint (shoulder, elbow, and wrist). Nonetheless, the SCI subjects could activate their shoulder antagonist muscles, elbow flexors, and wrist extensor (extensor carpi radialis) for isometric tasks, but did not activate them during the reaching movements. These results demonstrate that for reaching movements, the SCI subjects used a strikingly different pattern of intact muscle activities than control subjects. Hence, the findings imply that the nervous system is capable of choosing either the control pattern or the SCI pattern. We would speculate that control subjects do not select the SCI pattern because the different choice of muscles results in kinematic features (reduced fingertip speed, multiple shoulder accelerations) other than the global features that are somehow less advantageous or efficient.