Quantifying Dynamic Balance in Young, Elderly and Parkinson's Individuals: A Systematic Review

Introduction: Falling is one of the primary concerns for people with Parkinson's Disease and occurs predominately during dynamic movements, such as walking. Several methods have been proposed to quantify dynamic balance and to assess fall risk. However, no consensus has been reached concerning which method is most appropriate for examining walking balance during unperturbed and perturbed conditions, particularly in Parkinson's Disease individuals. Therefore, this systematic review aimed to assess the current literature on quantifying dynamic balance in healthy young, elderly and Parkinson's individuals during unperturbed and perturbed walking.Methods: The PubMed database was searched by title and abstract for publications quantifying dynamic balance during unperturbed and mechanically perturbed walking conditions in elderly adults and PD. Inclusion criteria required publications to be published in English, be available in full-text, and implement a dynamic balance quantification method. Exclusion criteria included clinical dynamic balance measures, non-mechanical perturbations, pathologies other than PD, and dual-tasking conditions. The initial database search yielded 280 articles, however, only 81 articles were included after title, abstract and full-text screening. Methodological quality and data were extracted from publications included in the final synthesis.Results: The dynamic balance articles included 26 Coefficient of Variation of Spatiotemporal Variability, 10 Detrended Fluctuation Analysis, 20 Lyapunov Exponent, 7 Maximum Floquet Multipliers, 17 Extrapolated Center of Mass, 11 Harmonic Ratios, 4 Center of Mass-Center of Pressure Separation, 2 Gait Stability Ratio, 1 Entropy, 3 Spatiotemporal Variables, 2 Center of Gravity and Center of Pressure, and 2 Root Mean Square in the final synthesis. Assessment of methodological quality determined that 58 articles had a low methodological rating, a 22 moderate rating, and 1 having a high rating.Conclusion: Careful consideration must be given when selecting a method to quantify dynamic balance because each method defines balance differently, reflects a unique aspect of neuromuscular stability mechanisms, and is dependent on the walking condition (unperturbed vs. perturbed). Therefore, each method provides distinct information into stability impairment in elderly and PD individuals

Implicit video feedback produces positive changes in landing mechanics

Abstract Background Implicit (IF) and explicit (EF) feedback are two motor learning strategies demonstrated to alter movement patterns. There is conflicting evidence on which strategy produces better outcomes. The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of reduced IF and EF video feedback on lower extremity landing mechanics. Methods Thirty participants (24 ± 2 years, 1.7 ± 0.1 m, 70 ± 11 kg) were randomly assigned to three groups: IF (n = 10), EF (n = 10), and control (CG) (n = 10). They performed twelve box-drop jumps three times a week on the training sessions for six weeks. Only IF and EF groups received video feedback on the training sessions. IF was cued to focus their attention on the overall jump, while EF was cued to focus on position of their knees. 3D lower extremity biomechanics were tested on testing sessions with no feedback. All sessions were at least 24 h apart from another. Testing sessions included baseline testing (pretest), testing after 3 training sessions with 100% feedback (pst1), testing after 6 training sessions with 33.3% feedback (pst2), testing after 6 training sessions with 16.6% feedback (Pst3), and testing 1 month after with no feedback (retention – ret). ANOVA compared differences between groups and time at initial contact and peak for hip flexion (HF, °) and abduction angle (HA, °), hip abduction moment (HAM, Nm/kgm), knee flexion (KF, °) and abduction angle (KA, °), knee abduction moment (KAM, Nm/kgm) and VGRF (N) (p < 0.05). Results A significant main effect for group was found between IF and EF groups for HA (IF = − 6.7 ± 4; EF = − 9.4 ± 4.1) and KAM (IF = 0.05 ± 0.2; EF = − 0.07 ± 0.2) at initial contact, and peaks HA (IF = − 3.5 ± 4.5; EF = − 7.9 ± 4.7) and HAM (IF = 1.1 ± 0.6; EF = 0.9 ± 0.4). A significant main effect for time at initial contact for HF (pre = 32.4 ± 3.2; pst2 = 36.9 ± 3.2; pst3 = 37.9 ± 3.7; ret. = 34.1 ± 3.7), HAM (pre = 0.1 ± 0.1; pst1 = 0.04 ± 0.1; pst3 = 0.1 ± 0.01), KA (pre = 0.7 ± 1.1; pst1 = 0.2 ± 1.2; pst3 = 1.7 ± 1), and KAM (pre = 0.003 ± 0.1; pst3 = 0.01 ± 0.1) was found. Discussion/conclusion We found that implicit feedback produced positive changes in landing mechanics while explicit feedback degraded motor learning. Our results indicate that implicit feedback should be used in programs to lower the ACL injury risk. We suggest that implicit feedback should be frequent in the beginning and not be reduced as much following the acquisition phase