| Literature DB >> 15912186 |
Tim L A Doyle1, Eric L Dugan, Brendan Humphries, Robert U Newton.
Abstract
The aim of this project was to evaluate the use of a new analysis technique, fractal dimension analysis, for quantification of quiet stance centre of pressure (COP). By using a fractal dimension analysis of COP, it might be possible to gain more information about control during quiet stance than traditional analyses have previously allowed. The current project considered a group of young healthy participants and a group of elderly healthy participants to compare traditional measures of COP against a fractal dimension analysis of COP. Results indicated that both types of analyses are able to distinguish between eyes open and eyes closed in the elderly group. However, the fractal dimension analysis more accurately detected differences between the participant groups when standing with their eyes closed. Based on these results it is suggested that fractal dimension analysis is more informative about posture control than traditional measures. It is suggested that a fractal dimension type of analysis can be incorporated into clinical testing to identify patients with pathologies.Entities:
Year: 2004 PMID: 15912186 PMCID: PMC1074506 DOI: 10.7150/ijms.1.11
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Med Sci ISSN: 1449-1907 Impact factor: 3.738
Figure 1Representative data for illustrative purposes. Elderly participant data during eyes open condition. Original data in solid line, surrogate data represented by dashed line. For clarity only 30 seconds of the 2 minute data collection are presented.
Figure 2Mean(SD) results of fractal dimension analysis of COP in A/P direction. ^ indicate a significant difference between young and elderly in the eyes closed condition; * indicate a significant difference between eyes open and eyes closed in the elderly only.
Figure 3Mean(SD) results of fractal dimension analysis of COP in M/L direction. No significant differences were present.
Results for traditional measures of quiet stance in the young participant group as indicated by mean(SD) . Significance denoted by *.
| Open | Closed | |
|---|---|---|
| A/P Range (cm) | 3.31(1.31) | 3.60(1.52) |
| M/L Range (cm) | 2.63(1.95) | 2.41(1.64) |
| A/P Peak Sway Vel. (cm.s-1) | 5.12(3.41) | 6.90(7.97) |
| M/L Peak Sway Vel. (cm.s-1) | 5.57(4.88) | 6.17(8.76) |
| Excursion Area (cm2) | 10.19(3.39)* | 11.89(5.90)* |
Results for traditional measures of quiet stance in the elderly participant group as indicated by mean(SD). Significance denoted by *.
| Open | Closed | |
|---|---|---|
| A/P Range (cm) | 3.27(0.76)* | 3.90(0.93)* |
| M/L Range (cm) | 2.35(0.93) | 2.15(0.81) |
| A/P Peak Sway Vel. (cm.s-1) | 5.74(1.88)* | 9.38(4.19)* |
| M/L Peak Sway Vel. (cm.s-1) | 4.33(1.07) | 4.75(1.12) |
| Excursion Area (cm2) | 9.87(2.46) | 17.53(8.33) |