Failures in adaptive locomotion: trial-and-error exploration to determine adequate foot elevation over obstacles
- 117 Downloads
Lifting the limb sufficiently to clear an obstacle seems like a straightforward task, yet trips are a common cause of falls across all ages. Examination of obstacle contacts in the lab revealed a progressive decrease in foot elevation with repeated exposures, ultimately resulting in failure (Heijnen et al. Exp Brain Res 23:219–231, 2012). The purpose of this study was to determine if the progressive decrease in foot elevation continued when knowledge of obstacle contact was removed. Twenty-one young adults (mean 20.0 ± 1.0 years; 8 males) crossed a 20 cm obstacle in a 12 m walkway for 150 trials. The obstacle was covertly lowered between the lead and trail limb crossing of the obstacle, which eliminated obstacle contact with the trail limb if the limb was too low. The average failure rate was 8%, substantially higher than the 1–2% observed for stationary, visible obstacles. Therefore, tactile information from obstacle contact was instrumental for guiding the trail limb; visual information and joint angle information were insufficient for most participants. Foot elevation change over successive trials varied across participants, and was categorized as (1) asymptotic decrease (N = 11, 52%), with foot elevation converging to obstacle height, (2) linear decrease (N = 7, 33%), and (3) stable (N = 3, 14%). The asymptotic and stable groups appeared to have reasonable knowledge of obstacle height; the linear group did not. The asymptotic behavior is consistent with participants exploring the region above the obstacle through trial-and-error to determine appropriate foot elevation.
KeywordsAdaptive locomotion Failures Falls Young adults
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Corrigan JP, Cashman WF, Brady MP (1992) Proprioception in the cruciate deficient knee. Bone Joint J 74:247–250Google Scholar
- Milner A, Goodale M (1995) The visual brain in action. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Patla AE (1991) Adaptability of human gait: implications for the control of locomotion. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
- Pontecorvo SM, Heijnen MJH, Muir BC, Rietdyk S (2015) The relationship between gaze behavior and failure to cross a stationary, visible obstacle. In: International society of posture and gait research world congress, Seville, SpainGoogle Scholar
- Winter DA (1991) Biomechanics and motor control of human gait: normal, elderly and pathological. University of Waterloo Press, WaterlooGoogle Scholar
- Wong C, Wong G, Pearson KG, Lomber SG (2016) Memory-guided stumbling correction in the hindlimb of quadrupeds relies on parietal area 5. Cereb Cortex, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhw391
- Wong C, Pearson KG, Lomber SG (2017) Contributions of Parietal Cortex to the Working Memory of an Obstacle Acquired Visually or Tactilely in the Locomoting Cat. Cereb Cortex, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhx186