Skip to main content

Effect of somatosensory and neurofeedback training on balance in older healthy adults: a preliminary investigation

Aging Clinical and Experimental Research volume 30, pages 745–753 (2018)Cite this article

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of balance training with somatosensory and neurofeedback training on dynamic and static balance in healthy, elderly adults. The sample group consisted of 45 healthy adults randomly assigned to one of the three test groups: somatosensory, neurofeedback, and a control. Individualization of the balance program started with pre-tests for static and dynamic balances. Each group had 15- and 30-min training sessions. All groups were tested for static (postural stability) and dynamic balances (Berg Balance Scale) in acquisition and transfer tests (fall risk of stability and timed up and go). Improvements in static and dynamic balances were assessed by somatosensory and neurofeedback groups and then compared with the control group. Results indicated significant improvements in static and dynamic balances in both test groups in the acquisition test. Results revealed a significant improvement in the transfer test in the neurofeedback and somatosensory groups, in static and dynamic conditions, respectively. The findings suggest that these methods of balance training had a significant influence on balance. Both the methods are appropriate to prevent falling in adults. Neurofeedback training helped the participants to learn static balance, while somatosensory training was effective on dynamic balance learning. Further research is needed to assess the effects of longer and discontinuous stimulation with somatosensory and neurofeedback training on balance in elderly adults.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

References

  1. Aartolahti E, Tolppanen AM, Lönnroos E et al (2015) Health condition and physical function as predictors of adherence in long-term strength and balance training among community-dwelling older adults. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 61:452–457

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Sturnieks DL, St George R, Lord SR (2008) Balance disorders in the elderly. Clin Neurophysiol 38:467–478

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Paquette MR, Li Y, Hoekstra J, Bravo J (2015) An 8-week reactive balance training program in older healthy adults: a preliminary investigation. J Sport Health Science 4:263–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Graham DF, Carty CP, Lloyd DG et al (2015) Biomechanical predictors of maximal balance recovery performance amongst community-dwelling older adults. Exp Gerontol 66:39–46

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Chang NY, Uchanski RM, Hullar TE (2012) Temporal Integration of Auditory and Vestibular Stimuli. Laryngoscope 122:1379–1384

  6. Hatton AL, Dixon J, Martin D et al (2009) The effect of textured surfaces on postural stability and lower limb muscle activity. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 19:957–964

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Perry SD (2006) Evaluation of age-related plantar-surface insensitivity and onset age of advanced insensitivity in older adults using vibratory and touch sensation tests. Neurosci Lett 392:62–67

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Palluel E, Nougier V, Olivier I (2008) Do spike insoles enhance postural stability and plantar surface cutaneous sensitivity in the elderly? AGE 30:53–61

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Priplata AA, Niemi JB, Harry JD et al (2003) Vibrating insoles and balance control in elderly people. Lancet 362:1123–1124

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Lesemann FHP, Reuter EM, Godde B (2015) Tactile stimulation interventions: influence of stimulation parameters on sensorimotor behavior and neurophysiological correlates in healthy and clinical samples. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 51:126–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Gruzelier JH, Foks M, Steffert T et al (2014) Beneficial outcome from EEG-neurofeedback on creative music performance, attention and well-being in school children. Biol Psychol 95:86–95

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Zhang Y, Chen Y, Bressler SL et al (2008) Response preparation and inhibition: the role of the cortical sensorimotor beta rhythm. Neuroscience 156:238–246

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Ninausa MC, Kobera SE, Wittea M et al (2015) Brain volumetry and self-regulation of brain activity relevant for neurofeedback. Biol Psychol 110:126–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Hammond DC (2007) Neurofeedback for the enhancement of athletic performance and physical balance. Am Board Sport Psychol 1:1–9

    Google Scholar 

  15. Basta D, Todt I, Ernst A (2007) Characterization of age related changes in vestibular evoked myogenic potential. J Vest Res 17:93–98

    Google Scholar 

  16. Rossi-Izquierdo M, Ernst A, Soto-Varela A et al (2012) Vibrotactile neurofeedback balance training in patients with Parkinson’s disease: reducing the number of falls. Gait Posture 37:195–200

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Azarpaikan A, Taherii HR, Sohrabi M (2014) Neurofeedback and physical balance in Parkinson’s patients. Gait Posture 40:177–181

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Goldberg DP, Gater R, Sartorius N et al (1997) The validity of two versions of the GHQ in the WHO study of mental illness in general health care. Psychol Med 27:191–197

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Macaulaya C, Battistab M, Lebbyc PC et al (2003) Geriatric performance on the neurobehavioral cognitive status examination (Cognistat): What is normal? Arch Clin Neuropsychol 18:463–471

    Google Scholar 

  20. Allison B, Neuper C (2010) Could anyone use a BCI? In: Tan D, Nijholt A (eds) Brain–computer interfaces: Human computer interaction series. Springer, London, pp 35–54

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Reichert JL, Kober SE, Neuper C et al (2015) Resting-state sensor-imotor rhythm (SMR) power predicts the ability to up-regulate SMR in an EEG-instrumental conditioning paradigm. Clin Neurophysiol 126:2068–2077

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Halder S, Varkuti B, Bogdan M et al (2013) Prediction of brain–computer interface aptitude from individual brain structure. Front Hum Neurosci 7:105

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Dickson CT, Kirk IJ, Oddie SD et al (1995) Classification of theta-related cells in the entorhinal cortex: cell discharges are controlled by the ascending brainstem synchronizing pathway in parallel with hippocampal theta-related cells. Hippocampus 5:306–319

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Behm D, Colado JC (2012) The Effectiveness of resistance training using unstable surfaces and devises for rehabilitation. Int J Sports Phys Therapy 7:226–241

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kennedy PM, Inglis JT (2002) Distribution and behaviour of glabrous cutaneous receptors in the human foot sole. J Physiol 1:995–1002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Wu G, Chiang JH (1997) The significance of somatosensory stimulations to the human foot in the control of postural reflexes. Brain Res 114:163–169

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Merriman NA, Whyatt C, Setti A et al (2015) Successful balance training is associated with improved multisensory function in fall-prone older adults. Comput Hum Behav 45:192–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Wilson ML, Rome K, Hodgson D et al (2008) Effect of textured foot orthotics on static and dynamic postural stability in middle-aged females. Gait Posture 27:36–42

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Magill R, Anderson D. Motor learning and control: concepts and applications, 10th edn. McGraw-Hill Education

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Laboratory of Physical Education and Sport Science, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Motor Behavior, Faculty of Physical Education and Sport Science, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, P.O. Box: 9177948979, Mashhad, Iran

    Atefeh Azarpaikan & Hamidreza Taheri Torbati

Authors
  1. Atefeh Azarpaikan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hamidreza Taheri Torbati
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hamidreza Taheri Torbati.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

Ethical approval was granted by the local ethics committee.

Informed consent

Each patient also provided written informed satisfaction approved by the Institutional Review Board for ethical human subject research.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Azarpaikan, A., Taheri Torbati, H. Effect of somatosensory and neurofeedback training on balance in older healthy adults: a preliminary investigation. Aging Clin Exp Res 30, 745–753 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-017-0835-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-017-0835-3

Keywords

  • Static balance
  • Dynamic balance
  • Somatosensory training
  • Neurofeedback training