Sensorimotor and Gait Training
STAND (Eyes Open)
STAND (Eyes Closed)
GAIT
Intervention group
Control group
TA (%MVIC)
���
��
��
��
��
��
��
��
���
T: p=0.024
G: p=0.169
TxG: p=0.204
���
T: p=0.105
G: p=0.66
TxG: p=0.399
���
T: p=0.009
G: p=0.161
TxG: p=0.811
��
��
�
Baseline
8th week
Baseline
8th week
Baseline
8th week
Figure 3: ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
�������������������������
Nerve conduction studies
There was significant difference in the
conduction velocity of the peroneal nerve
for time effect (p=0.007) and time × group
interaction (p=0.022) whereas a nonsignificant
difference was found for the
group effect (p>0.05). Conduction velocity of
the peroneal nerve showed 6.43% increase
in the intervention group whereas control
group showed an increase of 0.6% only. Both
within- and between-group comparisons
of latency, amplitude and duration of the
peroneal nerve were found to be nonsignificant
(Table 3).
Conduction velocity for tibial nerve showed
significant time effect (p<0.001) while group
effect and time × group interaction were
non-significant. There was an increase in
conduction velocity in both groups (12.46%
in the intervention group and 8.83% in the
control group). Also, time × group interaction
was found significant for tibial nerve latency
(p=0.03). The intervention group showed
decrease in the distal latency of tibial nerve
by 8.54%, while the control group showed
increase in the latency by 6.97%. There was
no significant difference in the amplitude
and duration of the peroneal nerve with
respect to time or group (Table 3).
Electromyographic activity
Figures 2 and 3 present the results of EMG
analysis of the muscles studied after
intervention. During eyes-open stance, the
time×group interaction in the muscle activity
of the tibialis anterior (p=0.013), medial
gastrocnemius (p=0.004) and multifidus
(p=0.001) showed significant changes after
the intervention, whereas only medial
gastrocnemius (p=0.003) and multifidus
(p=0.004) showed significant changes in
eyes-closed condition after the intervention.
On the other hand, treadmill walking found
significant group effect (p=0.002) as well
as time × group interaction (p=0.003) for
multifidus muscle indicate 20.66% reduction
were recorded in the intervention group,
while 37.57% increase was recorded in the
control group. Also, treadmill walking
showed significant time effect (p=0.002) for
the tibialis anterior muscle (22.8% increase
in the intervention group and 14.34%
increase in the control group).
Discussion
The effect of sensorimotor and gait training
on proprioception, nerve function and
electromyographic activity of lower limb
muscles in DPN patients were evaluated in
the present study.
Current Pedorthics | September-October | January/Feburary 2020
27