JN Fuel your research with LabChart
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol (August 4, 2004). doi:10.1152/jn.00423.2004
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
93/1/64    most recent
00423.2004v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Oates, A. R.
Right arrow Articles by Greig, M. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Oates, A. R.
Right arrow Articles by Greig, M. A.
Submitted on April 26, 2004
Accepted on July 22, 2004

Control of Dynamic Stability during Gait Termination on a Slippery Surface

Alison R. Oates1, Aftab E. Patla1*, James S. Frank1, and Michael A. Greig1

1 Kinesiology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: patla{at}healthy.uwaterloo.ca.

There are three common ways by which to successfully terminate gait: 1) decreased acceleration of whole-body centre of mass (COM) through a flexor synergy in the trail leg, 2) increased deceleration of whole-body COM through an extensor synergy in the front limb, and 3) an energy/momentum transfer to dissipate any remaining momentum if the first two strategies are unsuccessful. Healthy individuals were asked to stop on a slippery surface while we examined their unexpected response to the slippery surface. Kinetic data from the forceplates revealed lower braking forces in the slip trials compared to normal gait termination trials. Subjects were unable to control their centre of pressure (COP) to manipulate the COM as revealed by increased deviations and maximum absolute ranges of COP movement. Subject COM deviated farther in both horizontal planes and lowered further during the slip compared to normal gait termination trials. Arm movements were effective in dissipating forward COM movement. In addition, there likely was a transfer of forward to lateral momentum to stop forward progression. All recorded muscle activity in the lower limbs and back increased during the slip to provide support to the lower limbs and correct upright balance. The trailing limb shortened its final step to provide support to the lowering COM. The balance correction response seen here resembles previous reactions to perturbations during locomotion suggesting there is a generalized strategy employed by the nervous system to correct for disturbances and maintain balance.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2004 by the The American Physiological Society.