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


     


J Neurophysiol (August 22, 2007). doi:10.1152/jn.01226.2006
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
98/4/2266    most recent
01226.2006v1
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 Nieuwenhuijzen, H.
Right arrow Articles by Duysens, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Nieuwenhuijzen, H.
Right arrow Articles by Duysens, J.
Submitted on November 22, 2006
Accepted on August 19, 2007

Proactive and reactive mechanisms play a role in stepping on inverting surfaces during gait

Henk Nieuwenhuijzen1 and Jacques Duysens1*

1 Rehabilitation Medicine, UMC St Radboud, Nijmegen, Netherlands

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: j.duysens{at}reval.umcn.nl.

Ankle inversions have been studied extensively during standing conditions. However, inversion traumas occur during more dynamic conditions, like walking. Therefore, in this study sudden ankle inversions were elicited in twelve healthy subjects who stepped on a trap door while walking on a treadmill. First, ten control trials (no inversion) were presented. Then, twenty stimulus (25° of rotation) and control trials were presented randomly. EMG recordings were made of six lower leg muscles. All muscles showed a short latency response (SLR) of ~ 40 ms and a late latency response (LLR) of ~ 90 ms. The peroneal muscles, showed the largest amplitudes in both responses. The functionally more important larger and more consistent LLR response was too late to resist the induced stretch during the inversion. The functional relevance of this response must lie after the inversion. During the first trial a widespread startle-like coactivation of the LLR was observed. The last trials showed only a recruitement of the peroneal muscles and to a lesser extend the gastrocnemius lateralis which is seen as a switch from reactive control to more proactive adaptive strategies. These proactive strategies were investigated separately by comparing trials in which inversion was expected (but not occurred) with those in which subjects knew that no inversion would occur. Anticipation of a possible inversion was expressed in decreased Tibialis Anterior activity prior to initial contact, consistent with a more cautious and stable foot placement. Furthermore, immediately after landing, the peroneal muscles were activated to counteract the upcoming stretch.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2007 by the The American Physiological Society.