Detecting artificially impaired balance in human locomotion: metrics, perturbation effects and detection thresholds.

IF 2.8 2区 生物学 Q2 BIOLOGY
Journal of Experimental Biology Pub Date : 2025-05-15 Epub Date: 2025-05-22 DOI:10.1242/jeb.249339
Jiaen Wu, Michael Raitor, Guan Rong Tan, Kristan L Staudenmayer, Scott L Delp, C Karen Liu, Steven H Collins
{"title":"Detecting artificially impaired balance in human locomotion: metrics, perturbation effects and detection thresholds.","authors":"Jiaen Wu, Michael Raitor, Guan Rong Tan, Kristan L Staudenmayer, Scott L Delp, C Karen Liu, Steven H Collins","doi":"10.1242/jeb.249339","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Measuring balance is important for detecting impairments and developing interventions to prevent falls, but there is no consensus on which method is most effective. Many balance metrics derived from steady-state walking data have been proposed, such as step-width variability, step-time variability, foot placement predictability, maximum Lyapunov exponent and margin of stability. Recently, perturbation-based metrics such as center of mass displacement have also been explored. Perturbations typically involve unexpected disturbances applied to the subject. In this study we collected walking data from 10 healthy human subjects while walking normally and while impairing balance with ankle braces, eye-blocking masks and pneumatic jets on their legs. In some walking trials we also applied mechanical perturbations to the pelvis. We obtained a comprehensive biomechanics dataset and compared the ability of various metrics to detect impaired balance using steady-state walking and perturbation recovery data. We also compared metric performance using thresholds informed by data from multiple subjects versus subject-specific thresholds. We found that step-width variability, step-time variability and foot placement predictability, using steady-state data and subject-specific thresholds, detected impaired balance with the highest accuracy (≥86%), whereas other metrics were less effective (≤68%). Incorporating perturbation data did not improve accuracy of these metrics, although this comparison was limited by the small amount of perturbation data included and analyzed. Subject-specific baseline measurements improved the detection of changes in balance ability. Thus, in clinical practice, taking baseline measurements might improve the detection of impairment due to aging or disease progression.</p>","PeriodicalId":15786,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Biology","volume":"228 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12148027/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Biology","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.249339","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Measuring balance is important for detecting impairments and developing interventions to prevent falls, but there is no consensus on which method is most effective. Many balance metrics derived from steady-state walking data have been proposed, such as step-width variability, step-time variability, foot placement predictability, maximum Lyapunov exponent and margin of stability. Recently, perturbation-based metrics such as center of mass displacement have also been explored. Perturbations typically involve unexpected disturbances applied to the subject. In this study we collected walking data from 10 healthy human subjects while walking normally and while impairing balance with ankle braces, eye-blocking masks and pneumatic jets on their legs. In some walking trials we also applied mechanical perturbations to the pelvis. We obtained a comprehensive biomechanics dataset and compared the ability of various metrics to detect impaired balance using steady-state walking and perturbation recovery data. We also compared metric performance using thresholds informed by data from multiple subjects versus subject-specific thresholds. We found that step-width variability, step-time variability and foot placement predictability, using steady-state data and subject-specific thresholds, detected impaired balance with the highest accuracy (≥86%), whereas other metrics were less effective (≤68%). Incorporating perturbation data did not improve accuracy of these metrics, although this comparison was limited by the small amount of perturbation data included and analyzed. Subject-specific baseline measurements improved the detection of changes in balance ability. Thus, in clinical practice, taking baseline measurements might improve the detection of impairment due to aging or disease progression.

检测人体运动中人为受损的平衡:度量、扰动效应和检测阈值。
测量平衡对于检测损伤和制定预防跌倒的干预措施很重要,但对于哪种方法最有效尚无共识。从稳态步行数据中导出的许多平衡指标已被提出,如步宽可变性、步长可变性、足部放置可预测性、最大李雅普诺夫指数和稳定裕度。最近,基于微扰的度量,如质心位移也被探索。扰动通常包括施加在被摄体上的意外干扰。在这项研究中,我们收集了10名健康人类受试者的行走数据,这些受试者在正常行走和在脚踝支架、眼罩和腿部气动喷射器损害平衡的情况下行走。在一些行走试验中,我们还对骨盆施加了机械扰动。我们获得了一个全面的生物力学数据集,并比较了使用稳态行走和摄动恢复数据检测平衡受损的各种指标的能力。我们还比较了使用来自多个受试者的数据的阈值和特定于受试者的阈值的度量性能。我们发现,使用稳态数据和受试者特定阈值,步宽变异性、步长变异性和足部放置可预测性检测平衡受损的准确率最高(≥86%),而其他指标效果较差(≤68%)。纳入微扰数据并没有提高这些指标的准确性,尽管这种比较受到纳入和分析的微扰数据数量的限制。受试者特定基线测量改善了平衡能力变化的检测。因此,在临床实践中,采取基线测量可能会改善对衰老或疾病进展引起的损伤的检测。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
10.70%
发文量
494
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Experimental Biology is the leading primary research journal in comparative physiology and publishes papers on the form and function of living organisms at all levels of biological organisation, from the molecular and subcellular to the integrated whole animal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信