Forth Katharine E, Metter E Jeffrey, Paloski William H
National Space Biomedical Research Institute, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
Gait Posture. 2007 Jan;25(1):56-62. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2005.12.008. Epub 2006 Feb 7.
Increased postural instability and the subsequent elevation in fall incidence with increasing age are important contributors for hip fractures and developing frailty. When testing for such instability, most studies characterize balance in terms of center-of-mass (COM) deviation from a finite point, the "equilibrium point", located at the center of a subject's stance. For example, the clinically accepted equilibrium score (EQscore) represents instability as the maximum peak-to-peak sway about the "equilibrium point". An alternative theory views balance as being controlled within a "stability margin" in which all corrective actions are based on the time to contact (TTC) of the body's COM with that margin. This study examines the differences offered by evaluating balance control using the EQscore and TTC approach across several age groups and sessions. Consenting subjects from the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging were recruited (N=155) from each age decade (20s-80s) who were generally healthy and free from neurological diagnoses. Results showed TTC tests detected significant variations in eyes open versus eyes closed testing that were unpredictable by EQscore. Further, TTC produced differences in age-related stability threats not seen using EQscore. The TTC data also provided a discriminating difference between subjects who fell in the difficult tests and those who maintained posture. Overall, these data suggest EQscore might not sufficiently account for dynamic control components the body may be using to maintain balance. TTC may offer a more accurate estimate of postural stability (functional ability) than EQscore based on its inclusion of a velocity component to detect dynamic changes.
随着年龄增长,姿势稳定性下降以及随之而来的跌倒发生率升高是髋部骨折和身体虚弱的重要促成因素。在测试这种不稳定性时,大多数研究根据质心(COM)相对于位于受试者站立中心的一个有限点(“平衡点”)的偏差来描述平衡。例如,临床上公认的平衡分数(EQscore)将不稳定性表示为围绕“平衡点”的最大峰峰值摆动。另一种理论认为平衡是在一个“稳定裕度”内受到控制的,其中所有纠正动作都基于身体质心与该裕度的接触时间(TTC)。本研究考察了在多个年龄组和测试环节中使用EQscore和TTC方法评估平衡控制所呈现出的差异。从巴尔的摩老年纵向研究中招募了来自每个年龄十年(20多岁至80多岁)的同意参与研究的受试者(N = 155),这些受试者总体健康且无神经学诊断。结果显示,TTC测试检测到的睁眼与闭眼测试中的显著差异是EQscore无法预测的。此外, TTC揭示了与年龄相关的稳定性威胁方面的差异,而使用EQscore则未观察到这些差异。TTC数据还显示了在困难测试中跌倒的受试者与保持姿势的受试者之间的显著差异。总体而言,这些数据表明EQscore可能无法充分解释身体用于维持平衡的动态控制成分。基于其包含用于检测动态变化的速度成分,TTC可能比EQscore更准确地估计姿势稳定性(功能能力)。