Choosing the Optimal Trigger Point for Analysis of Movements after Stroke Based on Magnetoencephalographic Recordings. (13th January 2010)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Waldmann, Guido; Schauer, Michael; Woldag, Hartwig; Hummelsheim, Horst
• Other Names: Kidwell Chelsea S. Academic Editor.
• Is Part Of: Stroke research and treatment. Volume 2010(2010)
• Publication Date: 2010-01-13
• Subjects: Cerebrovascular disease -- Periodicals; Stroke; Cerebrovascular Disorders; Cerebrovascular disease; Periodicals; Periodicals; Fulltext; Internet Resources; Periodicals; 616.81
• DOI: 10.4061/2010/467673
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2090-8105

Abstract

Abstract : The aim of this study was to select the optimal procedure for analysing motor fields (MF) and motor evoked fields (MEF) measured from brain injured patients. Behavioural pretests with patients have shown that most of them cannot stand measurements longer than 30 minutes and they also prefer to move the hand with rather short breaks between movements. Therefore, we were unable to measure the motor field (MF) optimally. Furthermore, we planned to use MEF to monitor cortical plasticity in a motor rehabilitation procedure. Classically, the MF analysis refers to rather long epochs around the movement onset (M-onset). We shortened the analysis epoch down to a range from 1000 milliseconds before until 500 milliseconds after M-onset to fulfil the needs of the patients. Additionally, we recorded the muscular activity (EMG) by surface electrodes on the extensor carpi ulnaris and flexor carpi ulnaris muscles. Magnetoencephalographic (MEG) data were recorded from 9 healthy subjects, who executed horizontally brisk extension and flexion in the right wrist. Significantly higher MF dipole strength was found in data based on EMG-onset than in M-onset based data. There was no difference in MEF I dipole strength between the two trigger latencies. In conclusion, we recommend averaging in respect to the EMG-onset for the analysis of both components MF as well as MEF.