We have located links that may give you full text access.
Relative contributions of postural balance mechanisms reveal studying the CoP displacement alone may be incomplete for analysis of challenging standing postures.
Gait & Posture 2023 Februrary 18
BACKGROUND: The mechanical consequences of the motor actions used to maintain upright standing balance can be discriminated in two mechanisms: i) moving the center of pressure (CoP) within the base of support (M1); and ii) modifying the whole-body angular momentum (M2). Since the contribution of M2 to the whole-body CoM acceleration increases with postural constraints, a postural analysis focusing only on the CoP trajectory (i.e. M1) could ignore the majority of the control actions in challenging postural tasks. The objective of this study was to determine the contributions of the two postural balance mechanisms across postures with different areas of the base of support.
METHODS: Forty-one healthy young adults (19 females, 22.9 ± 2.9 years old) stood quietly on a forceplate, maintaining four different postures: bipedal, tandem, unipedal and unipedal on a 4-cm wooden bar; each with eyes open and for 60 s. Relative contributions of the two balance postural mechanisms were computed for each posture, in both directions of the horizontal plane.
RESULTS: The posture impacted the mechanisms contributions, where the contribution of M1 decreased between each posture in the mediolateral direction as the area of the base of support was reduced. The contribution of M2 in the mediolateral direction was not negligible (about 1/3) in tandem and unipedal postures and became dominant (nearly 90% on average) in the most challenging unipedal posture.
SIGNIFICANCE: This suggests the contribution of M2 should not be neglected for the analysis of postural balance, and particularly in challenging standing postures.
METHODS: Forty-one healthy young adults (19 females, 22.9 ± 2.9 years old) stood quietly on a forceplate, maintaining four different postures: bipedal, tandem, unipedal and unipedal on a 4-cm wooden bar; each with eyes open and for 60 s. Relative contributions of the two balance postural mechanisms were computed for each posture, in both directions of the horizontal plane.
RESULTS: The posture impacted the mechanisms contributions, where the contribution of M1 decreased between each posture in the mediolateral direction as the area of the base of support was reduced. The contribution of M2 in the mediolateral direction was not negligible (about 1/3) in tandem and unipedal postures and became dominant (nearly 90% on average) in the most challenging unipedal posture.
SIGNIFICANCE: This suggests the contribution of M2 should not be neglected for the analysis of postural balance, and particularly in challenging standing postures.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
Perioperative echocardiographic strain analysis: what anesthesiologists should know.Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 April 11
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app