Display options
Cite
McGibbon CA, Krebs DE, Wagenaar R. Stepping stability: effects of sensory perturbation. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2005;2:9doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-2-9.
McGibbon, C. A., Krebs, D. E., & Wagenaar, R. (2005). Stepping stability: effects of sensory perturbation. Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 29. https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-2-9
McGibbon, Chris A, et al. "Stepping stability: effects of sensory perturbation." Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation vol. 2 (2005): 9. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-2-9
McGibbon CA, Krebs DE, Wagenaar R. Stepping stability: effects of sensory perturbation. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2005 May 27;2:9. doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-2-9. PMID: 15921515; PMCID: PMC1180849.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2005 May 27;2:9. doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-2-9.

Stepping stability: effects of sensory perturbation.

Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation

Chris A McGibbon, David E Krebs, Robert Wagenaar

Affiliations

  1. Institute of Biomedical Engineering, University of New Brunswick, 25 Dineen Drive, Fredericton, New Brunswick E3B 5A3, Canada. [email protected]

PMID: 15921515 PMCID: PMC1180849 DOI: 10.1186/1743-0003-2-9

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Few tools exist for quantifying locomotor stability in balance impaired populations. The objective of this study was to develop and evaluate a technique for quantifying stability of stepping in healthy people and people with peripheral (vestibular hypofunction, VH) and central (cerebellar pathology, CB) balance dysfunction by means a sensory (auditory) perturbation test.

METHODS: Balance impaired and healthy subjects performed a repeated bench stepping task. The perturbation was applied by suddenly changing the cadence of the metronome (100 beat/min to 80 beat/min) at a predetermined time (but unpredictable by the subject) during the trial. Perturbation response was quantified by computing the Euclidian distance, expressed as a fractional error, between the anterior-posterior center of gravity attractor trajectory before and after the perturbation was applied. The error immediately after the perturbation (Emax), error after recovery (Emin) and the recovery response (Edif) were documented for each participant, and groups were compared with ANOVA.

RESULTS: Both balance impaired groups exhibited significantly higher Emax (p = .019) and Emin (p = .028) fractional errors compared to the healthy (HE) subjects, but there were no significant differences between CB and VH groups. Although response recovery was slower for CB and VH groups compared to the HE group, the difference was not significant (p = .051).

CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that individuals with balance impairment have reduced ability to stabilize locomotor patterns following perturbation, revealing the fragility of their impairment adaptations and compensations. These data suggest that auditory perturbations applied during a challenging stepping task may be useful for measuring rehabilitation outcomes.

References

  1. Clin Neurophysiol. 2000 Oct;111(10):1838-42 - PubMed
  2. Biol Cybern. 2000 Apr;82(4):335-43 - PubMed
  3. Exp Brain Res. 2001 Nov;141(1):110-20 - PubMed
  4. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1994 May;42(5):506-12 - PubMed
  5. Neurosci Lett. 1995 Sep 8;197(2):133-6 - PubMed
  6. J Gerontol. 1991 Nov;46(6):M196-203 - PubMed
  7. Clin Electroencephalogr. 1993 Oct;24(4):151-9 - PubMed
  8. Mov Disord. 1993 Jul;8(3):305-14 - PubMed
  9. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 2003 Apr;16(2):192-8 - PubMed
  10. Exp Brain Res. 1993;95(2):308-18 - PubMed
  11. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2001 Mar;9(1):76-80 - PubMed
  12. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 1997 Mar;52(2):M88-93 - PubMed
  13. J Vestib Res. 1993 Winter;3(4):419-29 - PubMed
  14. Phys Ther. 1992 Jul;72(7):505-14 - PubMed
  15. J Biomech. 1990;23(5):503-6 - PubMed
  16. Motor Control. 2001 Jul;5(3):254-69 - PubMed
  17. J Neurophysiol. 1998 Jul;80(1):255-61 - PubMed
  18. J Vestib Res. 1998 Sep-Oct;8(5):381-97 - PubMed
  19. J Neurosci Methods. 1995 May;58(1-2):39-48 - PubMed
  20. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1999 Feb;80(2):186-91 - PubMed
  21. Exp Brain Res. 1995;104(3):480-92 - PubMed
  22. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 1999 Jun;14(5):297-308 - PubMed
  23. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1987 Jul;35(7):644-8 - PubMed
  24. Gait Posture. 2002 Feb;15(1):83-93 - PubMed
  25. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec. 1994 Nov-Dec;56(6):325-30 - PubMed
  26. Phys Ther. 1997 May;77(5):534-52 - PubMed
  27. J Biomech. 1997 Apr;30(4):331-7 - PubMed
  28. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2000 May;55(5):M270-7 - PubMed
  29. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1993 Feb;89(1):22-8 - PubMed
  30. J Vestib Res. 1992 Winter;2(4):323-47 - PubMed
  31. J Biomech. 1998 Dec;31(12):1111-8 - PubMed
  32. Gait Posture. 1998 Oct 1;8(2):117-123 - PubMed
  33. Br Med J. 1977 Jan 29;1(6056):261-4 - PubMed
  34. J Biomech. 1992 Oct;25(10):1233-6 - PubMed
  35. J Neurophysiol. 2003 Aug;90(2):666-74 - PubMed
  36. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2000 Jul-Aug;37(4):445-54 - PubMed
  37. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1993 Oct;109(4):735-41 - PubMed
  38. Exp Brain Res. 2000 May;132(1):103-13 - PubMed
  39. Clin Rehabil. 2000 Feb;14(1):88-95 - PubMed
  40. J Biomech. 1998 Apr;31(4):377-81 - PubMed
  41. J Rehabil Res Dev. 1995 Oct;32(3):227-35 - PubMed

Publication Types