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


     


J Neurophysiol 93: 64-70, 2005. First published August 4, 2004; doi:10.1152/jn.00423.2004
0022-3077/05 $8.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow A corrigendum has been published
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
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
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 ISI Web of Science (2)
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.

Control of Dynamic Stability During Gait Termination on a Slippery Surface

A. R. Oates, A. E. Patla, J. S. Frank and M. A. Greig

Gait and Posture Laboratory, Kinesiology Department, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

Submitted 26 April 2004; accepted in final form 22 July 2004

There are three common ways by which to successfully terminate gait: decreased acceleration of whole-body center of mass (COM) through a flexor synergy in the trail leg, increased deceleration of whole-body COM through an extensor synergy in the front limb, and 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 with normal gait-termination trials. Subjects were unable to control their center 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 with 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.


Address for reprint requests and other correspondence: A. E. Patla, Kinesiology Dept., University of Waterloo, 200 University Ave. W., Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1, Canada (E-mail: patla{at}healthy.uwaterloo.ca)







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2005 by the The American Physiological Society.