AminiAghdam Soran, Müller Roy, Blickhan Reinhard
Department of Motion Science, Institute of Sport Science, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Seidelstrasse 20, 07749 Jena, Germany; Department of Neurology/Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Klinikum Bayreuth GmbH, HoheWarte 8, 95445 Bayreuth, Germany.
Department of Motion Science, Institute of Sport Science, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Seidelstrasse 20, 07749 Jena, Germany.
Hum Mov Sci. 2018 Dec;62:176-183. doi: 10.1016/j.humov.2018.10.011. Epub 2018 Oct 29.
This study aimed to explore the control of dynamic stability of the imposed trunk-flexed gaits across uneven ground. For ten young healthy participants, we compared the anteroposterior margin of stability (MoS) and lower limb joint kinematics at foot-contact during accommodating a consecutive stepdown and step-up (10-cm visible drop) to that of level steps while maintaining four postures: regular erect, ∼30°, ∼50° and maximal trunk flexion from the vertical. Two-way repeated measures ANOVAs revealed no significant step × posture interactions for the MoS (p = .187) and for the parameters that contributed to the MoS calculation (p > .05), whereas significant interactions were found for the hip flexion, hip position (relative to the posterior boundary of the base of support) and the knee flexion. The main effect of step (p = .0001), but not posture (p = .061), on the MoS was significant. Post hoc tests, compared with the level step, showed that the decreased magnitude of the MoS during stepping down (p = .011)-mainly due to a further forward displacement of the center of mass position (p = .006)-significantly increased in the immediate following step-up (p = .002) as a consequence of a substantial increase in the base of support (p = .003). In the stepdown versus level step, the hip and knee flexions as well as the hip position did not significantly change in the trunk-flexed gaits (p > .05). In the step-up, the knee flexion increased (except for the gaits with the maximum trunk flexion), whereas other kinematic variables remained unchanged. Quantifying the step-to-step control of dynamic stability in a perturbed walking reflected continuous control adaptations through the interaction between gait and posture. In fact, the able-bodied participants were able to safely control the motion of the body's CoM with the combination of compensatory kinematic adjustments in lower-limb and adaptations in stepping pattern.
本研究旨在探索在不平地面上施加躯干前屈步态时的动态稳定性控制。对于10名年轻健康的参与者,我们比较了在连续下台阶和上台阶(10厘米可见落差)过程中足部接触时的前后稳定性边缘(MoS)和下肢关节运动学,与在保持四种姿势(正常直立、约30°、约50°以及相对于垂直方向最大躯干前屈)下水平台阶时的情况进行对比。双向重复测量方差分析显示,对于MoS(p = 0.187)以及对MoS计算有贡献的参数(p > 0.05),未发现显著的台阶×姿势交互作用,而对于髋关节屈曲、髋关节位置(相对于支撑面基部的后边界)和膝关节屈曲则发现了显著的交互作用。台阶对MoS的主效应显著(p = 0.0001),而姿势对MoS的主效应不显著(p = 0.061)。事后检验表明,与水平台阶相比,下台阶过程中MoS的减小幅度(p = 0.011)——主要是由于质心位置进一步向前位移(p = 0.006)——在紧接着的上台阶过程中显著增加(p = 0.002),这是由于支撑面大幅增加(p = 0.003)的结果。在下台阶与水平台阶对比中,躯干前屈步态下的髋关节和膝关节屈曲以及髋关节位置没有显著变化(p > 0.05)。在上台阶过程中,膝关节屈曲增加(除了最大躯干前屈的步态),而其他运动学变量保持不变。量化在受扰行走中动态稳定性的逐步控制反映了通过步态和姿势之间的相互作用进行的连续控制适应。事实上,身体健全的参与者能够通过下肢的补偿性运动学调整和步幅模式的适应相结合,安全地控制身体质心的运动。