Cardiorespiratory and Muscle Metabolic Responses During Conventional Versus Motion Sensor-Assisted Strategies for Functional Electrical Stimulation Standing After Spinal Cord Injury

This is a case series study with the objective of comparing two motion sensor automated strategies to avert knee buckle during functional electrical stimulation (FES)-standing against a conventional hand-controlled (HC) FES approach. The research was conducted in a clinical exercise laboratory gymnasium at the University of Sydney, Australia. The automated strategies, Aut-A and Aut-B, applied fixed and variable changes of neurostimulation, respectively, in quadriceps amplitude to precisely control knee extension during standing. HC was an "on-demand" increase of stimulation amplitude to maintain stance. Finally, maximal FES amplitude (MA) was used as a control condition, whereby knee buckle was prevented by maximal isometric muscle recruitment. Four AIS-A paraplegics undertook 4 days of testing each, and each assessment day comprised three FES standing trials using the same strategy. Cardiorespiratory responses were recorded, and quadriceps muscle oxygenation was quantified using near-infrared spectroscopy. For all subjects, the longest standing times were observed during Aut-A, followed by Aut-B, and then HC and MA. The standing times of the automated strategies were superior to HC by 9-64%. Apart from a lower heart rates during standing (P = 0.034), the automation of knee extension did not promote different cardiorespiratory responses compared with HC. The standing times during MA were significantly shorter than during the automated or "on-demand" strategies (by 80-250%). In fact, the higher isometric-evoked quadriceps contraction during MA resulted in a greater oxygen demand (P