| Literature DB >> 28700633 |
Kazuhiro Chidori1,2, Yuji Yamamoto2,3.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of the lateral amplitude and regularity of upper body fluctuation on step time variability. Return map analysis was used to clarify the relationship between step time variability and a history of falling. Eleven healthy, community-dwelling older adults and twelve younger adults participated in the study. All of the subjects walked 25 m at a comfortable speed. Trunk acceleration was measured using triaxial accelerometers attached to the third lumbar vertebrae (L3) and the seventh cervical vertebrae (C7). The normalized average magnitude of acceleration, the coefficient of determination ($R^2$) of the return map, and the step time variabilities, were calculated. Cluster analysis using the average fluctuation and the regularity of C7 fluctuation identified four walking patterns in the mediolateral (ML) direction. The participants with higher fluctuation and lower regularity showed significantly greater step time variability compared with the others. Additionally, elderly participants who had fallen in the past year had higher amplitude and a lower regularity of fluctuation during walking. In conclusion, by focusing on the time evolution of each step, it is possible to understand the cause of stride and/or step time variability that is associated with a risk of falls.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28700633 PMCID: PMC5507271 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0180898
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Demographic characteristics of all subjects.
| Characteristics | Younger adults | Older adults | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (year) | 21.0 ± 0.6 | 78.5 ± 5.0 | < 0.01 |
| Gender, male/female (n) | 9/3 | 3/8 | |
| Height (m) | 1.7 ± 0.1 | 1.6 ± 0.1 | < 0.01 |
| Weight (kg) | 55.8 ± 8.3 | 57.4 ± 8.1 | ns |
| Short physical performance battery | 0.15 | 0.10 | |
| (SPPB) | - | 11.0 ± 1.5 | |
| Fall history (n) | - | 3 |
Values shown are the means ± standard deviations. ns, non-significant
Fig 1Return map analysis.
Return map of the time series of the observed data (right panel), Xn versus Xn + 1 using the amplitude of nRMS at each step corresponding to the series of points (blue circles) in the left panel.
Gait speed, step CV, nRMS and regularity at L3, C7 in the ML direction.
| Younger adults | Older adults | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Gait speed (m/s) | 1.35±0.15 | 1.23±0.10 | 0.03 |
| Step CV (%) | 2.3±0.5 | 3.9±1.5 | 3.49×10−4 |
| nRMS at L3 | 0.08±0.01 | 0.11±0.03 | 0.03 |
| Regularity at L3 ( | 0.11±0.12 | 0.35±0.33 | 0.04 |
| nRMS at C7 | 0.06±0.02 | 0.11±0.03 | 4.54×10−5 |
| Regularity at C7 ( | 0.48±0.28 | 0.39±0.34 | ns |
Coefficient of determination (R2) to indicate the goodness-of-fit of the regression line in the return map. Values are means ± standard deviation. The data reflect the regularity of the time series of the average difference in stability between successive steps. CV, coefficient of variation; nRMS, normalized root mean square; L3, lower trunk; C7, upper trunk.
Fig 2Relationships between the nRMS values of trunk acceleration and regularity in the ML direction.
nRMS, normalized root mean square; ML, mediolateral. The solid line shows the average values. Filled circles show older adults, and open circles show younger adults.
Fig 3Examples of return map and time series for C7.
Left side of each subfigure shows the return map. The x-axis is Xn times, and the y-axis is Xn + 1 times the amplitude of nRMS, which was standardized from 0 to 1 in each participant. The right side of each subfigure shows the time series of nRMS. Red lines show the mean of the averaged nRMS in pooled participants. The value in each example shows step CV in each participant.
Fig 4Boxplots of step CV for each cluster in the upper trunk (C7).