就像视觉上的倒立摆一样,随着年龄的增长,避免即将摔倒的平衡任务变得越来越困难。

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q4 NEUROSCIENCES
Hannah E Park, Avijit Bakshi, James R Lackner, Paul DiZio
{"title":"就像视觉上的倒立摆一样,随着年龄的增长,避免即将摔倒的平衡任务变得越来越困难。","authors":"Hannah E Park, Avijit Bakshi, James R Lackner, Paul DiZio","doi":"10.1007/s00221-025-06997-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Younger adults (YA) and older adults (OA) used a joystick to stabilize an unstable visual inverted pendulum (VIP) with a fundamental frequency (.27 Hz) of half that of bipedal human sway. Their task was to keep the VIP upright and to avoid ± 60° \"fall\" boundaries. Both age groups were tested with joystick gains and delays simulating age-related muscle strength and reflex slowing, respectively. In previous VIP and analogous self-balancing tasks, we observed a mixture of discrete corrective commands toward the balance point and destabilizing commands toward an impending fall. We hypothesized that (1) OA would fall more than YA, (2) traditional whole-trial stability and variability measures would differ across age groups and VIP conditions, and (3) different dynamics of corrective and destabilizing commands would discriminate falling from recovery. Results: (i) Traditional whole-trial performance metrics of fall incidence and the variance of position and velocity were worse in OA than YA and worse with longer delays and excessive joystick gains; (ii) OA made fewer corrective and more destabilizing commands than YA only when falling was imminent; (iii) when falls were imminent, a logistic model fit the percentage of inactive, corrective, and destabilizing commands as a function of time left to fall; and (iv) OA were like YA in switching between inaction and action, but exhibited less frequent and less prompt corrective commands than destabilizing commands relative to YA. We discuss whether such a decision-like process may also operate in a bipedal stance.</p>","PeriodicalId":12268,"journal":{"name":"Experimental Brain Research","volume":"243 2","pages":"44"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11735510/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"In a visual inverted pendulum balancing task avoiding impending falls gets harder as we age.\",\"authors\":\"Hannah E Park, Avijit Bakshi, James R Lackner, Paul DiZio\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00221-025-06997-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Younger adults (YA) and older adults (OA) used a joystick to stabilize an unstable visual inverted pendulum (VIP) with a fundamental frequency (.27 Hz) of half that of bipedal human sway. Their task was to keep the VIP upright and to avoid ± 60° \\\"fall\\\" boundaries. Both age groups were tested with joystick gains and delays simulating age-related muscle strength and reflex slowing, respectively. In previous VIP and analogous self-balancing tasks, we observed a mixture of discrete corrective commands toward the balance point and destabilizing commands toward an impending fall. We hypothesized that (1) OA would fall more than YA, (2) traditional whole-trial stability and variability measures would differ across age groups and VIP conditions, and (3) different dynamics of corrective and destabilizing commands would discriminate falling from recovery. Results: (i) Traditional whole-trial performance metrics of fall incidence and the variance of position and velocity were worse in OA than YA and worse with longer delays and excessive joystick gains; (ii) OA made fewer corrective and more destabilizing commands than YA only when falling was imminent; (iii) when falls were imminent, a logistic model fit the percentage of inactive, corrective, and destabilizing commands as a function of time left to fall; and (iv) OA were like YA in switching between inaction and action, but exhibited less frequent and less prompt corrective commands than destabilizing commands relative to YA. We discuss whether such a decision-like process may also operate in a bipedal stance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12268,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Experimental Brain Research\",\"volume\":\"243 2\",\"pages\":\"44\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11735510/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Experimental Brain Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-025-06997-x\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Experimental Brain Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-025-06997-x","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

年轻人(YA)和老年人(OA)使用操纵杆稳定不稳定的视觉倒立摆(VIP),其基频为0.27赫兹)是人类两足摆动的一半。他们的任务是保持VIP直立,并避免±60°的“坠落”边界。两个年龄组分别进行了操纵杆增益和延迟测试,模拟与年龄相关的肌肉力量和反射减慢。在先前的VIP和类似的自平衡任务中,我们观察到混合了朝向平衡点的离散校正命令和朝向即将下降的不稳定命令。我们假设:(1)OA会比YA下降更多,(2)传统的全试验稳定性和变异性测量在年龄组和VIP条件下会有所不同,(3)纠正和不稳定命令的不同动态会区分下降和恢复。结果:(i) OA患者摔倒发生率、位置和速度方差的传统全试验性能指标比YA患者差,延迟时间较长和操纵杆增益过大的患者更差;只有在即将下降时,OA才比YA作出更少的纠正和更不稳定的命令;(iii)当下跌迫在眉睫时,逻辑模型拟合不活跃、纠正和不稳定命令的百分比作为下跌剩余时间的函数;(iv) OA在不作为和行动之间的转换与YA相似,但相对于YA,表现出的纠正命令比不稳定命令更频繁和更不及时。我们讨论了这种类似决策的过程是否也可能在两足站立时运作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
In a visual inverted pendulum balancing task avoiding impending falls gets harder as we age.

Younger adults (YA) and older adults (OA) used a joystick to stabilize an unstable visual inverted pendulum (VIP) with a fundamental frequency (.27 Hz) of half that of bipedal human sway. Their task was to keep the VIP upright and to avoid ± 60° "fall" boundaries. Both age groups were tested with joystick gains and delays simulating age-related muscle strength and reflex slowing, respectively. In previous VIP and analogous self-balancing tasks, we observed a mixture of discrete corrective commands toward the balance point and destabilizing commands toward an impending fall. We hypothesized that (1) OA would fall more than YA, (2) traditional whole-trial stability and variability measures would differ across age groups and VIP conditions, and (3) different dynamics of corrective and destabilizing commands would discriminate falling from recovery. Results: (i) Traditional whole-trial performance metrics of fall incidence and the variance of position and velocity were worse in OA than YA and worse with longer delays and excessive joystick gains; (ii) OA made fewer corrective and more destabilizing commands than YA only when falling was imminent; (iii) when falls were imminent, a logistic model fit the percentage of inactive, corrective, and destabilizing commands as a function of time left to fall; and (iv) OA were like YA in switching between inaction and action, but exhibited less frequent and less prompt corrective commands than destabilizing commands relative to YA. We discuss whether such a decision-like process may also operate in a bipedal stance.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
5.00%
发文量
228
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Founded in 1966, Experimental Brain Research publishes original contributions on many aspects of experimental research of the central and peripheral nervous system. The focus is on molecular, physiology, behavior, neurochemistry, developmental, cellular and molecular neurobiology, and experimental pathology relevant to general problems of cerebral function. The journal publishes original papers, reviews, and mini-reviews.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信