Cortical activation following a balance disturbance
- 299 Downloads
Although recent work suggests that cortical processing can be involved in the control of balance responses, the central mechanisms involved in these reactions remain unclear. We presently investigated the characteristics of scalp-recorded perturbation-evoked responses (PERs) following a balance disturbance. Eight young adults stabilized an inverted pendulum using their ankle musculature while seated. When perturbations were applied to the pendulum, subjects were instructed to return (active condition) or not return (passive condition) the pendulum to its original stable position. Primary measures included peak latency and amplitude of early PERs (the first negative peak between 100 and 150 ms, N1), amplitude of late PERs (between 200 and 400 ms) and onset and initial amplitude of ankle muscle responses. Based on the timing of PERs, we hypothesized that N1 would represent sensory processing of the balance disturbance and that late PERs would be linked to the sensorimotor processing of balance corrections. Our results revealed that N1 was maximal over frontal–central electrode sites (FCz and Cz). Average N1 measures at FCz, Cz, and CPz were comparable between active and passive tasks (p>0.05). In contrast, the amplitude of late PERs at Cz was less positive for the active condition than for the passive (p<0.05). The similarity in N1 between tasks suggests a sensory representation of early PERs. Differences in late PERs may represent sensorimotor processing related to the execution of balance responses.
KeywordsEvent-related potential Cortex Sensorimotor Stability
This study was supported by the Physiotherapy Foundation of Canada (S.Q.), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (S.Q.), and by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (W.E.M.).
- Cram JR, Kasman GS, Holtz J (1998) Instrumentation. In: Colilla J (ed) Introduction to surface electromyography, chapter 3. Aspen Publications, Maryland, pp 43–80Google Scholar
- Dietz V, Quintern J, Berger W, Schenck E (1985a) Cerebral potentials and leg muscle e.m.g. responses associated with stance perturbation. Exp Brain Res 57:354–384Google Scholar
- Dietz V, Quintern J, Berger W (1985b) Afferent control of human stance and gait: evidence for blocking of group I afferents during gait. Exp Brain Res 61:53–163Google Scholar
- Horak FB, Macpherson JM (1996) Balance orientation and equilibrium. In: Shepard J, Rowell L (eds) Handbook of physiology. Exercise: regulation and integration of multiple systems, section 12, chapter 7. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 255–292Google Scholar
- Maki BE, Norrie RG, Zecevic A, Quant S, Kirshenbaum N, Bateni H, McIlroy WE (2001a) Initiation and execution of rapid balance reactions and stepping movements: which phases require visuospatial attention? In: Duysens J, Smits-Engelsman BCM, Kingma H (eds) Control of posture and gait. International Society for Posture and Gait Research, Maastricht, pp 573–576Google Scholar
- Rankin JK, Woollacott MH, Shumway-Cook A., Brown LA (2000) Cognitive influence on balance stability: a neuromuscular analysis in young and older adults. J Gerontol 55A:M112–M119Google Scholar