scholarly journals Balance task difficulty affects postural sway and cortical activity in healthy adolescents

2020 ◽  
Vol 238 (5) ◽  
pp. 1323-1333 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arnd Gebel ◽  
Tim Lehmann ◽  
Urs Granacher

Abstract Electroencephalographic (EEG) research indicates changes in adults’ low frequency bands of frontoparietal brain areas executing different balance tasks with increasing postural demands. However, this issue is unsolved for adolescents when performing the same balance task with increasing difficulty. Therefore, we examined the effects of a progressively increasing balance task difficulty on balance performance and brain activity in adolescents. Thirteen healthy adolescents aged 16–17 year performed tests in bipedal upright stance on a balance board with six progressively increasing levels of task difficulty. Postural sway and cortical activity were recorded simultaneously using a pressure sensitive measuring system and EEG. The power spectrum was analyzed for theta (4–7 Hz) and alpha-2 (10–12 Hz) frequency bands in pre-defined frontal, central, and parietal clusters of electrocortical sources. Repeated measures analysis of variance (rmANOVA) showed a significant main effect of task difficulty for postural sway (p < 0.001; d = 6.36). Concomitantly, the power spectrum changed in frontal, bilateral central, and bilateral parietal clusters. RmANOVAs revealed significant main effects of task difficulty for theta band power in the frontal (p < 0.001, d = 1.80) and both central clusters (left: p < 0.001, d = 1.49; right: p < 0.001, d = 1.42) as well as for alpha-2 band power in both parietal clusters (left: p < 0.001, d = 1.39; right: p < 0.001, d = 1.05) and in the central right cluster (p = 0.005, d = 0.92). Increases in theta band power (frontal, central) and decreases in alpha-2 power (central, parietal) with increasing balance task difficulty may reflect increased attentional processes and/or error monitoring as well as increased sensory information processing due to increasing postural demands. In general, our findings are mostly in agreement with studies conducted in adults. Similar to adult studies, our data with adolescents indicated the involvement of frontoparietal brain areas in the regulation of postural control. In addition, we detected that activity of selected brain areas (e.g., bilateral central) changed with increasing postural demands.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ainara Jauregi ◽  
Hongfang Wang ◽  
Stefanie Hassel ◽  
Klaus Kessler

Inhibition, the ability to withhold a response or to stop an initiated response, is a necessary cognitive function that can be vulnerable to an impairment. High levels of impulsivity have been shown to impact response inhibition and/or cognitive task performance. The present study investigated the spectral and spatio-temporal dynamics of response inhibition, during a combined go/no-go/stop-signal task, using magnetoencephalography (MEG) in a healthy undergraduate student population. Participants were divided by their level of impulsivity, as assessed by self-report measures, to explore potential differences between high (n=17) and low (n=17) impulsivity groups. Results showed that individuals scoring high on impulsivity failed significantly more NOGO and STOP trials than those scoring low, but no significant differences were found between stop-signal reaction times. During NOGO and STOP conditions, high impulsivity individuals showed significantly smaller M1 components in posterior regions, which could suggest an attentional processing deficit. During NOGO trials, the M2 component was found to be reduced in individuals scoring high, possibly reflecting less pre-motor inhibition efficiency, whereas in STOP trials, the network involved in the stopping process was engaged later in high impulsivity individuals. The high impulsivity group also engaged frontal networks more during the STOP-M3 component only, possibly as a late compensatory process. The lack of response time differences on STOP trials could indicate that compensation was effective to some degree (at the expense of higher error rates). Decreased frontal delta and theta band power was observed in high impulsivity individuals, suggesting a possible deficit in frontal pathways involved in motor suppression, however, unexpectedly, increased delta and theta band power in central and posterior sensors was also observed, which could be indicative of an increased effort to compensate for frontal deficits. Individuals scoring highly also showed decreased alpha power in frontal sensors, suggesting decreased inhibitory processing, along with reduced alpha suppression in posterior regions, reflecting reduced cue processing. These results provide evidence for how personality traits, such as impulsivity, relate to differences in the neural correlates of response inhibition.


2011 ◽  
Vol 504 (3) ◽  
pp. 204-208 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruna Velasques ◽  
Sergio Machado ◽  
Flávia Paes ◽  
Juliana Bittencourt ◽  
Clayton Amaral Domingues ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 102 ◽  
pp. 118-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivo Käthner ◽  
Selina C. Wriessnegger ◽  
Gernot R. Müller-Putz ◽  
Andrea Kübler ◽  
Sebastian Halder

2021 ◽  
Vol 91 ◽  
pp. 183-192
Author(s):  
Austin M. Tang ◽  
Kuang-Hsuan Chen ◽  
Angad S. Gogia ◽  
Roberto Martin Del Campo-Vera ◽  
Rinu Sebastian ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 146 ◽  
pp. 101-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Taylor Hornung ◽  
Wen-Hsuan Chan ◽  
Ralph-Axel Müller ◽  
Jeanne Townsend ◽  
Brandon Keehn

Neuroreport ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 7 (7) ◽  
pp. 1235-1240 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Klimesch ◽  
M. Doppelmayr ◽  
H. Russegger ◽  
T. Pachinger

Hippocampus ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (10) ◽  
pp. 1040-1053 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jui-Jui Lin ◽  
Michael D. Rugg ◽  
Sandhitsu Das ◽  
Joel Stein ◽  
Daniel S. Rizzuto ◽  
...  

2001 ◽  
Vol 112 (7) ◽  
pp. 1174-1185 ◽  
Author(s):  
W Klimesch ◽  
M Doppelmayr ◽  
H Wimmer ◽  
J Schwaiger ◽  
D Röhm ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Schedler ◽  
Pascal Leifeld ◽  
Tim Seidel ◽  
Dennis Brueckner ◽  
Thomas Muehlbauer

Abstract Objective Cross-sectional studies reported increased postural sway during balance tasks with a high (e.g., unipedal stance on foam ground) compared to a low (e.g., unipedal stance on firm ground) level of task difficulty. Therefore, practicing/training balance tasks using high compared to low stimuli seems to be beneficial as it addresses larger adaptive reserves. Thus, the present study was performed to investigate the role of task difficulty during practice on learning a dynamic balance task in healthy young adults. Results During acquisition, both practice groups (“Easy” or “Difficult” task condition) significantly improved their performance (i.e., time in balance). Further, the statistical analysis of post-practice performance revealed a significant main effect of test (i.e., better performance under easy compared to difficult test conditions, irrespective of group) but not of group. Additionally, the Group × Test interaction did not reach the level of significance, indicating that learning a dynamic balance task did not depend on the practiced task condition.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document