Sakanaka Tania E, Lakie Martin, Reynolds Raymond F
School of Sport, Exercise & Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Faculty of Medical Sciences, State University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil.
Front Hum Neurosci. 2021 May 17;15:660470. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2021.660470. eCollection 2021.
Are people with a characteristically large physiological sway rendered particularly unstable when standing on a moving surface? Is postural sway in standing individuals idiosyncratic? In this study, we examine postural sway in individuals standing normally, and when subtle continuous sinusoidal disturbances are applied to their support platform. We calculate consistency between conditions to verify if sway can be considered characteristic of each individual. We also correlate two different aspects of participants' responses to disturbance; their sway velocity and their regulation of body orientation.
Nineteen healthy adults (age 29.2 ± 3.2 years) stood freely on footplates coaxially aligned with their ankles and attached to a motorized platform. They had their eyes closed, and hips and knees locked with a light wooden board attached to their body. Participants either stood quietly on a fixed platform or on a slowly tilting platform (0.1 Hz sinusoid; 0.2 and 0.4 deg). Postural sway size was separated into two entities: (1) the spontaneous sway velocity component (natural random relatively rapid postural adjustments, RMS body angular velocity) and (2) the evoked tilt gain component (much slower 0.1 Hz synchronous tilt induced by the movement of the platform, measured as peak-to-peak (p-p) gain, ratio of body angle to applied footplate rotation).
There was no correlation between the velocity of an individual's sway and their evoked tilt gain ( = 0.34, = 0.15 and = 0.30, = 0.22). However, when considered separately, each of the two measurements showed fair to good absolute agreement within conditions. Spontaneous sway velocity consistently increased as participants were subjected to increasing disturbance. Participants who swayed more (or less) did so across all conditions [ICC = 0.95]. Evoked tilt gain also showed consistency between conditions [ICC = 0.79], but decreased from least to most disturbed conditions.
The two measurements remain consistent between conditions. Consistency between conditions of two very distinct unrelated measurements reflects the idiosyncratic nature of postural sway. However, sway velocity and tilt gain are not related, which supports the idea that the short-term regulation of stability and the longer-term regulation of orientation are controlled by different processes.
当站在移动表面上时,具有典型大生理摇摆的人是否会变得特别不稳定?站立个体的姿势摇摆是否因人而异?在本研究中,我们检查了正常站立个体以及其支撑平台受到细微连续正弦干扰时的姿势摇摆。我们计算不同条件之间的一致性,以验证摇摆是否可被视为每个人的特征。我们还关联了参与者对干扰反应的两个不同方面:他们的摇摆速度和身体方向的调节。
19名健康成年人(年龄29.2±3.2岁)自由站立在与脚踝同轴对齐并连接到电动平台的踏板上。他们闭上眼睛,用一块系在身体上的轻质木板固定臀部和膝盖。参与者要么安静地站在固定平台上,要么站在缓慢倾斜的平台上(0.1Hz正弦波;0.2度和0.4度)。姿势摇摆大小分为两个部分:(1)自发摇摆速度分量(自然随机相对快速的姿势调整,身体角速度均方根)和(2)诱发倾斜增益分量(由平台运动引起的慢得多的0.1Hz同步倾斜,以峰峰值(p-p)增益衡量,身体角度与施加的踏板旋转之比)。
个体的摇摆速度与其诱发倾斜增益之间没有相关性(=0.34,=0.15;=0.30,=0.22)。然而,当分别考虑时,这两项测量在不同条件下均显示出良好到极好的绝对一致性。随着参与者受到的干扰增加,自发摇摆速度持续增加。摇摆较多(或较少)的参与者在所有条件下都是如此[组内相关系数(ICC)=0.95]。诱发倾斜增益在不同条件下也显示出一致性[ICC=0.79],但从干扰最小到最大的条件下逐渐降低。
这两项测量在不同条件之间保持一致。两个非常不同的不相关测量条件之间的一致性反映了姿势摇摆的个体特异性。然而,摇摆速度和倾斜增益无关,这支持了稳定性的短期调节和方向的长期调节由不同过程控制的观点。