Influence of visual biofeedback and inherent stability on trunk postural control
Influence of visual biofeedback and inherent stability on trunk postural control
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.gaitpost.2020.06.011
复制
发表时间：
2020-07-01
期刊：
影响因子：
2.4
通讯作者：
Saavedra, Sandy
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Goodworth, Adam;Kratzer, Amy;Saavedra, Sandy
背景：对于从未实现独立站立的人，康复的重点是躯干姿势和平衡控制。视觉生物反馈有可能增加坐着平衡训练，但以前在这方面的工作一直局限于standing.Research问题：在多大程度上做不同类型的视觉生物反馈影响躯干摇摆坐着？方法：12名健康的年轻人坐在一个关节长凳上。在“摇摆参考”试验中，工作台倾斜向上和向下成比例的躯干摇摆在额状面。这种模式增加了平衡任务的难度，并要求参与者依赖视觉和前庭线索。通过旋转针规显示器向参与者提供不同的视觉生物反馈。试验持续165秒，随机排序，包括直接反馈（针旋转成比例的身体摇摆），反向反馈（针旋转方向相反的摇摆），延时反馈（0.5秒），随机反馈，闭上眼睛，或控制（眼睛打开屏幕关闭）。为了探讨固有稳定性的影响，试验重复和没有外部躯干support.Results：身体摇摆依赖于反馈类型。具体来说，直接和反向反馈减少均方根（RMS）摇摆最，时间延迟反馈有一个较小的影响，和随机视觉反馈增加参与者的RMS摇摆相比，控制。频域分析表明，直接和倒置的视觉反馈减少摇摆幅度在较低的频率，而具有最小的影响（或增加）摇摆幅度在较高frequency.Significance：这项研究扩展了以前的工作表明，视觉生物反馈可以有强大的影响坐在平衡，即使与外部支持。从不同类型的反馈条件的结果进一步了解大脑如何解释视觉生物反馈。基于频率的结果类似于以前的研究，使用不同的方式，并建议参与者解释生物反馈，通过感官补充，而不是感官替代。
Background: For individuals who never achieve independent standing, rehabilitation is focused on trunk posture and balance control. Visual biofeedback has the potential to augment sitting balance training, however previous work in this area has been limited to standing.Research question: To what extent do different types of visual biofeedback influence trunk sway in sitting?Methods: Twelve healthy young adults sat on an articulating bench. During 'sway referencing' trials, the bench tilted up and down in proportion to trunk sway in the frontal plane. This paradigm increased difficulty of the balance task and required participants to rely on visual and vestibular cues. Participants were provided different visual biofeedback through a rotating needle-gage display. Trials lasted 165 s, were ordered randomly, and included either direct feedback (needle rotated in proportion to body sway), inverted feedback (needle rotated in the opposite direction of sway), time delayed feedback (0.5 s), random feedback, eyes closed, or control (eyes open with screen off). To explore the impact of inherent stability, trials were repeated with and without external trunk support.Results: Body sway depended on feedback type. Specifically, direct and inverted feedback reduced root-mean-squared (RMS) sway the most, time delayed feedback had a smaller effect, and random visual feedback increased participants' RMS sway compared to control. Frequency domain analyses demonstrated direct and inverted visual feedback reduced sway amplitude at the lower frequencies while having minimal effect on (or increasing) sway amplitude at higher frequencies.Significance: This study extends previous work by showing that visual biofeedback can have powerful effects on sitting balance, even with external support. Results from the different types of feedback conditions further our understanding of how the brain interprets visual biofeedback. Frequency-based results were similar to previous studies using different modalities and suggest participants interpret biofeedback through sensory addition as opposed to sensory substitution.