Research

The relation between Ashworth scores and neuromechanical measurements of spasticity following stroke

Laila Alibiglou^1,2 , William Z Rymer^1,3 , Richard L Harvey^1,3 and Mehdi M Mirbagheri^1,3

¹  Sensory Motor Performance Program, Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago, Chicago, USA

²  Interdepartmental Neuroscience Program, Northwestern University, Chicago, USA

³  Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Northwestern University, Chicago, USA

author email corresponding author email

Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation 2008, 5:18doi:10.1186/1743-0003-5-18

Published:	15 July 2008

Abstract

Background

Spasticity is a common impairment that follows stroke, and it results typically in functional loss. For this reason, accurate quantification of spasticity has both diagnostic and therapeutic significance. The most widely used clinical assessment of spasticity is the modified Ashworth scale (MAS), an ordinal scale, but its validity, reliability and sensitivity have often been challenged. The present study addresses this deficit by examining whether quantitative measures of neural and muscular components of spasticity are valid, and whether they are strongly correlated with the MAS.

Methods

We applied abrupt small amplitude joint stretches and Pseudorandom Binary Sequence (PRBS) perturbations to both paretic and non-paretic elbow and ankle joints of stroke survivors. Using advanced system identification techniques, we quantified the dynamic stiffness of these joints, and separated its muscular (intrinsic) and reflex components. The correlations between these quantitative measures and the MAS were investigated.

Results

We showed that our system identification technique is valid in characterizing the intrinsic and reflex stiffness and predicting the overall net torque. Conversely, our results reveal that there is no significant correlation between muscular and reflex torque/stiffness and the MAS magnitude. We also demonstrate that the slope and intercept of reflex and intrinsic stiffnesses plotted against the joint angle are not correlated with the MAS.

Conclusion

Lack of significant correlation between our quantitative measures of stroke effects on spastic joints and the clinical assessment of muscle tone, as reflected in the MAS suggests that the MAS does not provide reliable information about the origins of the torque change associated with spasticity, or about its contributing components.