2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Postural control through force plate measurements in female AIS patients compared to their able-bodied peers

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The present understanding of the mechanisms responsible for postural deficit in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is still insufficient. This is important because some authors see one of the causes of this disease in the impaired postural control. Moreover, there is a reciprocal link between the level of postural imbalance and the clinical picture of these people. Therefore, we compared the center-of-pressure (COP) indices of 24 patients with AIS to 48 controls (CON) during four 20-s quiet stance trials with eyes open (EO) or closed (EC) and on firm or foam surface. This included sway amplitude, speed, sample entropy and fractal dimension. AIS had poorer postural steadiness only in the most difficult trial. In the remaining trials, AIS did as well as CON, while presenting a greater COP entropy than CON. Thus, the factor that made both groups perform equally could be the increased sway irregularity in AIS, which is often linked to higher automaticity and lower attention involvement in balance control. After changing the surface from hard to foam, puzzling changes in sway fractality were revealed. The patients decreased the fractal dimension in the sagittal plane identically to the CON in the frontal plane. This may suggest some problems with the perception of body axes in patients and reveals a hitherto unknown cause of their balance deficit.

          Related collections

          Most cited references30

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Measures of postural steadiness: differences between healthy young and elderly adults.

          Measures of postural steadiness are used to characterize the dynamics of the postural control system associated with maintaining balance during quiet standing. The objective of this study was to evaluate the relative sensitivity of center-of-pressure (COP)-based measures to changes in postural steadiness related to age. A variety of time and frequency domain measures of postural steadiness were compared between a group of twenty healthy young adults (21-35 years) and a group of twenty healthy elderly adults (66-70 years) under both eyes-open and eyes-closed conditions. The measures that identified differences between the eyes-open and eyes-closed conditions in the young adult group were different than those that identified differences between the eye conditions in the elderly adult group. Mean velocity of the COP was the only measure that identified age-related changes in both eye conditions, and differences between eye conditions in both groups. The results of this study will be useful to researchers and clinicians using COP-based measures to evaluate postural steadiness.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Proprioceptive, visual and vestibular thresholds for the perception of sway during standing in humans.

            1. Thresholds for the perception of postural sway induced by gentle perturbations were determined for five normal standing subjects. In this context we understand 'perception' to mean 'able to give a subjective report'. The thresholds for the perception of movements that were equivalent to sway in velocity and amplitude were determined when the available sensory input was limited to only one, or a pair, of the vestibular, visual, and proprioceptive systems. To examine vestibular inputs alone, vision was excluded and the whole body was moved with the ankles in a fixed position. To examine visual inputs alone, the body was kept stationary and a 'room' was moved around the subjects to simulate the relative visual-field movement that occurs during standing. To limit the available sensory input to proprioception from the legs, subjects were held stationary and balanced a load that was equivalent to their own body using their ankles. In this situation, perturbations were applied to the 'equivalent body' and these could only be perceived from the resulting ankle movements. Thresholds for perceiving ankle movements were also determined in the same posture, but with the leg muscles bearing no load. 2. The thresholds for the perception of sway during standing were very small, typically 0.003 rad at a velocity of 0.001 rad s-1, and even smaller movements were perceived as the mean velocity of the sway increased up to 0.003 rad s-1. No difference was found between the thresholds for perceiving forward sway and backward sway. Eye closure during standing did not affect the threshold for perceiving sway. 3. When sensory input was limited to proprioception from the legs, the thresholds for the perception of passive ankle movements were equivalent to the thresholds for the perception of sway during standing with all sensory inputs available. When the leg muscles were relaxed, the thresholds for perceiving ankle movements increased approximately twofold. 4. The visual thresholds for perceiving movement were higher than the proprioceptive thresholds at slower velocities of movement, but there was no difference at higher velocities. 5. Both the proprioceptive and visual thresholds were sufficiently small to allow perception of the sway that was recorded when the subjects stood normally in a relaxed manner. In contrast, the vestibular thresholds were an order of magnitude greater than the visual or proprioceptive thresholds and above the largest sway movements that were recorded during normal standing.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Entropy of balance - some recent results

              Background Entropy when applied to biological signals is expected to reflect the state of the biological system. However the physiological interpretation of the entropy is not always straightforward. When should high entropy be interpreted as a healthy sign, and when as marker of deteriorating health? We address this question for the particular case of human standing balance and the Center of Pressure data. Methods We have measured and analyzed balance data of 136 participants (young, n = 45; elderly, n = 91) comprising in all 1085 trials, and calculated the Sample Entropy (SampEn) for medio-lateral (M/L) and anterior-posterior (A/P) Center of Pressure (COP) together with the Hurst self-similariy (ss) exponent α using Detrended Fluctuation Analysis (DFA). The COP was measured with a force plate in eight 30 seconds trials with eyes closed, eyes open, foam, self-perturbation and nudge conditions. Results 1) There is a significant difference in SampEn for the A/P-direction between the elderly and the younger groups Old > young. 2) For the elderly we have in general A/P > M/L. 3) For the younger group there was no significant A/P-M/L difference with the exception for the nudge trials where we had the reverse situation, A/P Eyes Open. 5) In case of the Hurst ss-exponent we have for the elderly, M/L > A/P. Conclusions These results seem to be require some modifications of the more or less established attention-constraint interpretation of entropy. This holds that higher entropy correlates with a more automatic and a less constrained mode of balance control, and that a higher entropy reflects, in this sense, a more efficient balancing.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                d.borzucka@po.edu.pl
                Journal
                Sci Rep
                Sci Rep
                Scientific Reports
                Nature Publishing Group UK (London )
                2045-2322
                1 August 2022
                1 August 2022
                2022
                : 12
                : 13170
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.465902.c, ISNI 0000 0000 8699 7032, Faculty of Physiotherapy, , University School of Physical Education in Wroclaw, ; ul. Paderewskiego 35, 51-612 Wrocław, Poland
                [2 ]GRID grid.440608.e, ISNI 0000 0000 9187 132X, Faculty of Physical Education and Physiotherapy, , Opole University of Technology, ; ul. Prószkowska 76, 45-758 Opole, Poland
                Article
                17597
                10.1038/s41598-022-17597-y
                9343654
                35915125
                9b1b0ce5-4d4b-4329-8610-538e2b0d6f75
                © The Author(s) 2022

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 30 August 2021
                : 27 July 2022
                Categories
                Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2022

                Uncategorized
                motor control,somatosensory system,visual system,musculoskeletal system
                Uncategorized
                motor control, somatosensory system, visual system, musculoskeletal system

                Comments

                Comment on this article