Postural Control in Unipedal Quiet Stance in Young Female Gymnasts and the Effects of Training with Consideration of Transient Behavior of Postural Sway

The purpose of this study was twofold: (a) to compare postural control between a group of young female gymnasts (n = 15; age: 11.2 ± 1.9 years) and non-trained peers (n = 15; age: 10.9 ± 2.0 years), and (b) to investigate the effect of an 8-week whole body exercise intervention program on postural control in young female gymnasts. Postural control was assessed by recording center of pressure (CoP) movements during unipedal quiet stance. Velocity and amplitude of CoP movement in anterior-posterior (AP) and medial-lateral (ML) directions were considered. In addition to common trial-averaged CoP outcomes, we also considered the transient behavior of CoP movements, by calculating relative differences between the 1st and 2nd, and the 1st and 3rd 10-s intervals within the whole trial (DIF_21 and DIF_31, respectively). The gymnast group had lower total CoP velocity (Cohen’s d = 0.97) and AP amplitude (Cohen’s d = 0.85), compared to their non-trained peers. The gymnasts also had lower CoP AP amplitude DIF21 (Cohen’s d = 0.73), with almost constant values across all intervals. After the training ML CoP velocity was reduced for 13.12% (Cohen’s d = 0.60), while ML CoP amplitude increased (Cohen’s d = −0.89).

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstructed Patients Who Recovered Normal Postural Control Have Dissimilar Brain Activation Patterns Compared to Healthy Controls

Postural control, which is a fundamental functional skill, reflects integration and coordination of sensory information. Damaged anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) may alter neural activation patterns in the brain, despite patients’ surgical reconstruction (ACLR). However, it is unknown whether ACLR patients with normal postural control have persistent neural adaptation in the brain. Therefore, we explored theta (4–8 Hz) and alpha-2 (10–12 Hz) oscillation bands at the prefrontal, premotor/supplementary motor, primary motor, somatosensory, and primary visual cortices, in which electrocortical activation is highly associated with goal-directed decision-making, preparation of movement, motor output, sensory input, and visual processing, respectively, during first 3 s of a single-leg stance at two different task complexities (stable/unstable) between ACLR patients and healthy controls. We observed that ACLR patients showed similar postural control ability to healthy controls, but dissimilar neural activation patterns in the brain. To conclude, we demonstrated that ACLR patients may rely on more neural sources on movement preparation in conjunction with sensory feedback during the early single-leg stance period relative to healthy controls to maintain postural control. This may be a compensatory protective mechanism to accommodate for the altered sensory inputs from the reconstructed knee and task complexity. Our study elucidates the strategically different brain activity utilized by ACLR patients to sustain postural control.

The Specificity of Cognitive-Motor Dual-Task Interference on Balance in Young and Older Adults

Standing upright on stable and unstable surfaces requires postural control. Postural control declines as humans age, presenting greater risk of fall-related injury and other negative health outcomes. Secondary cognitive tasks can further impact balance, which highlights the importance of coordination between cognitive and motor processes. Past research indicates that this coordination relies on executive function (EF; the ability to control, maintain, and flexibly direct attention to achieve goals), which coincidentally declines as humans age. This suggests that secondary cognitive tasks requiring EF may exert a greater influence on balance compared to non-EF secondary tasks, and this interaction could be exaggerated among older adults. In the current study, we had younger and older adults complete two Surface Stability conditions (standing upright on stable vs. unstable surfaces) under varying Cognitive Load; participants completed EF (Shifting, Inhibiting, Updating) and non-EF (Processing Speed) secondary cognitive tasks on tablets, as well as a single task control scenario with no secondary cognitive task. Our primary balance measure of interest was sway area, which was measured with an array of wearable inertial measurement unit sensors. Replicating prior work, we found a main effect of Surface Stability with less sway on stable surfaces compared to unstable surfaces, and we found an interaction between Age and Surface Stability with older adults exhibiting significantly greater sway selectively on unstable surfaces compared to younger adults. New findings revealed a main effect of Cognitive Load on sway, with the single task condition having significantly less sway than two of the EF conditions (Updating and Shifting) and the non-EF condition (Processing Speed). We also found an interaction of Cognitive Load and Surface Stability on postural control, where Surface Stability impacted sway the most for the single task and two of the executive function conditions (Inhibition and Shifting). Interestingly, Age did not interact with Cognitive Load, suggesting that both age groups were equally impacted by secondary cognitive tasks, regardless the presence or type of secondary cognitive task. Taken together, these patterns suggest that cognitive demands vary in their impact on posture control across stable vs. unstable surfaces, and that EF involvement may not be the driving mechanism explaining cognitive-motor dual-task interference on balance.

The Mediating Role of Vision in the Relationship between Proprioception and Postural Control in Older Adults, as Compared to Teenagers and Younger and Middle-Aged Adults

The aim of this study is to analyze the mediating role of vision in the relationship between conscious lower limb proprioception (dominant knee) and bipedal postural control (with eyes open and closed) in older adults, as compared with teenagers, younger adults and middle-aged adults. Methods: The sample consisted of 119 healthy, physically active participants. Postural control was assessed using the bipedal Romberg test with participants’ eyes open and closed on a force platform. Proprioception was measured through the ability to reposition the knee at 45°, measured with the Goniometer Pro application’s goniometer. Results: The results showed an indirect relationship between proprioception and postural control with closed eyes in all age groups; however, vision did not mediate this relationship. Conclusions: Older adults outperformed only teenagers on the balance test. The group of older adults was the only one that did not display differences with regard to certain variables when the test was done with open or closed eyes. It seems that age does not influence performance on proprioception tests. These findings help us to optimize the design of training programs for older adults and suggest that physical exercise is a protective factor against age-related decline.

Static Postural Control Deficits in Adults with Myotonic Dystrophy Type 1, Steinert Disease

Background: Myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1) is characterized by progressive and predominantly distal muscle atrophy and myotonia. Gait and balance impairments, resulting in falls, are frequently reported in this population. However, the extent to which individuals with DM1 rely more on a specific sensory system for balance than asymptomatic individuals (AI) is unknown. Objective: Evaluate postural control performance in individuals with DM1 and its dependence on vision compared to AI. Methods: 20 participants with DM1, divided into two groups based on their diagnosis, i.e. adult and congenital phenotype, and 12 AI participants were recruited. Quiet standing postural control was assessed in two visual conditions: eyes-open and eyes-closed. The outcomes measures were center of pressure (CoP) mean velocity, CoP range of displacement in anteroposterior and mediolateral axis, and the 95% confidence ellipse’s surface. Friedman and Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance were used to compare outcomes between conditions and groups, respectively. Results: Significant group effect and condition effect were observed on postural control performance. No significant difference was observed between the two DM1 groups. The significant differences observed between the AI group and the two DM1 groups in the eyes-open condition were also observed in the eyes-closed condition. Conclusions: The result revealed poorer postural control performance in people with DM1 compared to AI. The DM1 group also showed similar decrease in performance than AI in eyes-closed condition, suggesting no excessive visual dependency.

Inter-Individual Variability in Postural Control During External Center of Mass Stabilization

Understanding the relation between the motion of the center of mass (COM) and the center of pressure (COP) is important to understand the underlying mechanisms of maintaining body equilibrium. One way to investigate this is to stabilize COM by fixing the joints of the human and looking at the corresponding COP reactions. However, this approach constrains the natural motion of the human. To avoid this shortcoming, we stabilized COM without constraining the joint movements by using an external stabilization method based on inverted cart-pendulum system. Interestingly, this method only stabilized COM of a subgroup of participants and had a destabilizing effect for others which implies significant variability in inter-individual postural control. The aim of this work was to investigate the underlying causes of inter-individual variability by studying the postural parameters of quiet standing before the external stabilization. Eighteen volunteers took part in the experiment where they were standing on an actuated cart for 335 s. In the middle of this period we stabilized their COM in anteroposterior direction for 105 s. To stabilize the COM, we controlled the position of the cart using a double proportional–integral–derivative controller. We recorded COM position throughout the experiment, calculated its velocity, amplitude, and frequency during the quiet standing before the stabilization, and used these parameters as features in hierarchical clustering method. Clustering solution revealed that postural parameters of quiet standing before the stabilization cannot explain the inter-individual variability of postural responses during the external COM stabilization. COM was successfully stabilized for a group of participants but had a destabilizing effect on the others, showing a variability in individual postural control which cannot be explained by postural parameters of quiet-stance.