Literature DB >> 23836111

Relative efficacy of various strategies for visual feedback in standing balance activities.

Michael W Kennedy1, Charles R Crowell, Aaron D Striegel, Michael Villano, James P Schmiedeler.   

Abstract

Seventy-nine young, healthy adults were led through static balance and weight-shifting activities in order to study the effects of visual feedback on balance. Based on their performance, the relative effects of various feedback properties were analyzed: (1) arrangement [direct center of pressure (CoP) vs. lateral weight distribution feedback], (2) numbers (presence vs. absence of numeric feedback), and (3) dimensionality (1D vs. 2D CoP information). In the static balance activity, subjects were instructed to maintain equal weight across both feet; in the dynamic weight-shifting activity, subjects were instructed to shift their weight to each displayed target location. For static balance, lateral symmetry and sway were measured by classical parameters using CoP, center of gravity (CoG), and the difference between the two (CoP-CoG). Weight-shifting balance performance was measured using the time required to shift between target CoP positions. Results indicated that feedback arrangement had a significant effect on static sway and dynamic weight shifting, with direct CoP feedback resulting in better balance performance than lateral weight distribution. Also, numbers had a significant effect on static sway, reducing lateral sway compared to feedback without numbers. Finally, 2D CoP feedback resulted in faster performance than 1D CoP feedback in dynamic weight shifting. These results show that altering different properties of visual feedback can have significant effects on resulting balance performance; therefore, proper selection of visual feedback strategy needs to take these effects into consideration.

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23836111     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-013-3634-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  30 in total

1.  Relative stability improves with experience in a dynamic standing task.

Authors:  J L Patton; W A Lee; Y C Pai
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Compatibility of postural behavior induced by two aspects of visual feedback: time delay and scale display.

Authors:  P Rougier
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2005-05-05       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Validity and reliability of the Nintendo Wii Balance Board for assessment of standing balance.

Authors:  Ross A Clark; Adam L Bryant; Yonghao Pua; Paul McCrory; Kim Bennell; Michael Hunt
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2009-12-11       Impact factor: 2.840

4.  Standing balance training: effect on balance and locomotion in hemiparetic adults.

Authors:  C J Winstein; E R Gardner; D R McNeal; P S Barto; D E Nicholson
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  1989-10       Impact factor: 3.966

5.  Effects of visual feedback of center-of-pressure displacements on undisturbed upright postural control of hemiparetic stroke patients.

Authors:  P Rougier; S Boudrahem
Journal:  Restor Neurol Neurosci       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 2.406

6.  Use of visual feedback in retraining balance following acute stroke.

Authors:  C Walker; B J Brouwer; E G Culham
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2000-09

7.  Effects of visual center of pressure feedback on postural control in young and elderly healthy adults and in stroke patients.

Authors:  Mylène C Dault; Mirjam de Haart; Alexander C H Geurts; Ilse M P Arts; Bart Nienhuis
Journal:  Hum Mov Sci       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 2.161

8.  A randomized controlled trial of an enhanced balance training program to improve mobility and reduce falls in elderly patients.

Authors:  Jayne Steadman; Nora Donaldson; Lalit Kalra
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 5.562

9.  Visual impairment following stroke: do stroke patients require vision assessment?

Authors:  Fiona Rowe; Darren Brand; Carole A Jackson; Alison Price; Linda Walker; Shirley Harrison; Carla Eccleston; Claire Scott; Nicola Akerman; Caroline Dodridge; Claire Howard; Tracey Shipman; Una Sperring; Sonia MacDiarmid; Cicely Freeman
Journal:  Age Ageing       Date:  2008-11-21       Impact factor: 10.668

Review 10.  Biofeedback for training balance and mobility tasks in older populations: a systematic review.

Authors:  Agnes Zijlstra; Martina Mancini; Lorenzo Chiari; Wiebren Zijlstra
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2010-12-09       Impact factor: 4.262

View more
  5 in total

1.  Real-time visual feedback of COM and COP motion properties differentially modifies postural control structures.

Authors:  Melissa C Kilby; Peter C M Molenaar; Semyon M Slobounov; Karl M Newell
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-09-19       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Relationship between Nintendo's Wii balance board derived variables and clinical balance scores in individuals with stroke.

Authors:  Sangeetha Madhavan; Sonia Pradhan
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2020-05-01       Impact factor: 2.840

3.  Visual oscillation effects on dynamic balance control in people with multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Lara Riem; Scott A Beardsley; Ahmed Z Obeidat; Brian D Schmit
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2022-08-17       Impact factor: 5.208

4.  Effects of Filtering the Center of Pressure Feedback Provided in Visually Guided Mediolateral Weight Shifting.

Authors:  Michael W Kennedy; Charles R Crowell; Michael Villano; James P Schmiedeler
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-03-18       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Impact of Visual Biofeedback of Trunk Sway Smoothness on Motor Learning during Unipedal Stance.

Authors:  Carlos Cruz-Montecinos; Antonio Cuesta-Vargas; Cristian Muñoz; Dante Flores; Joseph Ellsworth; Carlos De la Fuente; Joaquín Calatayud; Gonzalo Rivera-Lillo; Verónica Soto-Arellano; Claudio Tapia; Xavier García-Massó
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-05-01       Impact factor: 3.576

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.