Department of Health and Kinesiology, University of Utah, 250 South 1850 East, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA.
Department of Physical Therapy and Human Movement Sciences, Northwestern University, 645 N Michigan Ave, Suite. 1100, Chicago, IL 60611, USA.
J Exp Biol. 2022 Oct 1;225(19). doi: 10.1242/jeb.244509. Epub 2022 Oct 13.
Foot placement can be selected to anticipate upcoming perturbations, but it is unclear how this anticipatory strategy is influenced by available response time or precise knowledge of the perturbation's characteristics. This study investigates anticipatory and reactive locomotor strategies for repeated underfoot perturbations with varying levels of temporal certainty, physical certainty, and available response time. Thirteen healthy adults walked with random underfoot perturbations from a mechanized shoe. Temporal certainty was challenged by presenting the perturbations with or without warning. Available response time was challenged by adjusting the timing of the warning before the perturbation. Physical certainty was challenged by making perturbation direction (inversion or eversion) unpredictable for certain conditions. Linear-mixed effects models assessed the effect of each condition on the percentage change of margin of stability and step width. For perturbations with one stride or less of response time, we observed few changes to step width or margin of stability. As response time increased to two strides, participants adopted wider steps in anticipation of the perturbation (P=0.001). Physical certainty had little effect on gait for the step of the perturbation, but participants recovered normal gait sooner when the physical nature of the perturbation was predictable (P<0.001). Despite having information about the timing and direction of upcoming perturbations, individuals do not develop perturbation-specific feedforward strategies. Instead, they use feedback control to recover normal gait after a perturbation. However, physical certainty appears to make the feedback controller more efficient and allows individuals to recover normal gait sooner.
足部放置位置可用于预测即将发生的扰动,但目前尚不清楚这种预测策略如何受到可用反应时间或对扰动特征的准确了解的影响。本研究调查了在不同时间确定性、物理确定性和可用反应时间条件下,对重复足底扰动的预测性和反应性运动策略。13 名健康成年人在机械鞋上进行随机足底扰动行走。通过有无警告来挑战时间确定性,通过调整警告时间来挑战可用反应时间。通过使某些条件下的扰动方向(内翻或外翻)不可预测来挑战物理确定性。线性混合效应模型评估了每个条件对稳定性裕度和步幅变化百分比的影响。对于反应时间为一步或更短的扰动,我们观察到步幅或稳定性裕度的变化很小。随着反应时间增加到两步,参与者为预测扰动而采取更宽的步幅(P=0.001)。物理确定性对扰动步的步态影响不大,但当扰动的物理性质可预测时,参与者更快地恢复正常步态(P<0.001)。尽管人们可以获得有关即将发生的扰动的时间和方向的信息,但他们并没有开发出特定于扰动的前馈策略。相反,他们使用反馈控制在扰动后恢复正常步态。然而,物理确定性似乎使反馈控制器更有效,并且允许个体更快地恢复正常步态。