Fall risk during opposing stance perturbations among healthy adults and chronic stroke survivors
- 190 Downloads
Studies examining recovery from SLIPS and TRIPS indicate higher incidence of falls during SLIPS than TRIPS however, differences in the recovery mechanisms during these opposing perturbations have not been examined. We therefore aimed to compare the reactive balance responses contributing to fall risk during SLIPS and TRIPS at comparable perturbation intensity among community-dwelling healthy adults and chronic stroke survivors. Younger adults (N = 11), age-matched adults (N = 11) and chronic stroke survivors (N = 12) were exposed to a single SLIP and TRIP through a motorized treadmill (16 m/s2 , 0.20 m). Center of mass (COM) state stability was measured by recording COM position and velocity relative to base of support, i.e., Ḋ COM/BOS and Ẋ COM/BOS, respectively. Trunk and compensatory step kinematics were also recorded. During SLIPS, the incidence of falls among stroke survivors was greater than healthy adults (53.83% vs. 0%), however not for TRIPS. All groups showed higher change in postural stability from liftoff to touchdown during TRIPS than SLIPS. Among healthy adults higher change in Ḋ COM/BOS during TRIPS was accompanied by the ability to control trunk flexion at step touchdown and lower peak trunk velocity as compared with SLIPS, with no significant differences in compensatory step length between the perturbations (p > 0.05). Chronic stroke survivors increased compensatory step length during TRIPS versus SLIPS (p < 0.05) contributing to greater stability change. They were unable to control trunk excursion and peak trunk velocity as compared with the healthy adults leading to lower stability than healthy younger and age-matched adults during SLIPS and lower stability than younger adults during TRIPS. Difficulty in trunk control during SLIPS among all individuals and compensatory step length among stroke survivors emphasizes higher fall risk for SLIPS than TRIPS among these populations.
KeywordsHemiparesis Reactive balance Older adults Stability
This study was supported by the American Heart Association, Scientific Development grant (12SDG12170022). The authors would like to thank Abdul Karim, Harish Reddy and Juana Villagomez for assistance with data processing.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors have no conflict of interest.
- Batchelor FA, Hill KD, Mackintosh SF, Said CM, Whitehead CH (2012) Effects of a multifactorial falls prevention program for people with stroke returning home after rehabilitation: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 93:1648–1655. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2012.03.031 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Crenshaw JR, Rosenblatt NJ, Hurt CP, Grabiner MD (2012) The discriminant capabilities of stability measures, trunk kinematics, and step kinematics in classifying successful and failed compensatory stepping responses by young adults. J Biomech 45:129–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2011.09.022 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Feng H (1999) Limits of stability and postural sway in young and older people. Master’s thesis, Queen’s University, Ontario, pp 52–55Google Scholar
- Patel P, Bhatt T (2015) Adaptation to large-magnitude treadmill-based perturbations: improvements in reactive balance response. Physiol Rep 3 https://doi.org/10.14814/phy2.12247