| Literature DB >> 29997491 |
Lousin Moumdjian1,2, Jeska Buhmann1, Iris Willems2, Peter Feys2, Marc Leman1.
Abstract
Background: Interdisciplinary work is needed for scientific progress, and with this review, our interest is in the scientific progress toward understanding the underlying mechanisms of auditory-motor coupling, and how this can be applied to gait rehabilitation. Specifically we look into the process of entrainment and synchronization; where entrainment is the process that governs the dynamic alignments of the auditory and motor domains based on error-prediction correction, whereas synchronization is the stable maintenance of timing during auditory-motor alignment. Methodology: A systematic literature search in databases PubMed and Web of Science were searched up to 9th of August 2017. The selection criteria for the included studies were adult populations, with a minimum of five participants, investigating walking to an auditory stimulus, with an outcome measure of entrainment, and synchronization. The review was registered in PROSPERO as CRD42017080325.Entities:
Keywords: auditory stimuli; cueing; entrainment; music; neurological disease; outcome measures; synchronization; walking
Year: 2018 PMID: 29997491 PMCID: PMC6028729 DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2018.00263
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Hum Neurosci ISSN: 1662-5161 Impact factor: 3.169
Figure 1PRISMA flowchart of study selection process.
Descriptive characteristics of participants across studies.
| Buhmann et al., | X | N/A | 30 | 9/21 | 36.57 ± 14.94 | 17–77 | 66.67% musical education; 1/3: music while jogging | |
| Dickstein and Plax, | X | N/A | 10 | 0/10 | 24.2 | 22–29 | / | |
| Leow et al., | X | N/A | 43 | 19/24 | U | 18–20 | / | |
| Leow et al., | X | N/A | 11 | 5/6 | 22 | U | Music experience: 5.09 ± 6.02 years | |
| Marmelat et al., | X | N/A | Exp 1: 12Exp 2: 12 | Exp1: 5/7 Exp2: 7/5 | 28 ± 6 | U | / | |
| Mendonça et al., | X | N/A | 9 | 6/3 | 25 | U | / | |
| Roerdink et al., | X | N/A | 20 | 10/10 | 63.2 ± 3.6 | U | / | |
| Terrier and Deriaz, | X | N/A | 20 | 10/10 | 36 ± 11 | U | / | |
| Cha et al., | X | Stroke | 41 | 24/17 | 60.8 ± 19.8 | U | Onset in months: 6.68 ± 2.35; Able to walk 10 m independently; no hearing; visual deficits; MMSE ≥ 24; 19 R hemiparetic; 22 L hemiparetic | |
| Pelton et al., | X | Stroke | 8 | 5/3 | 70 ± 12 | 52–91 | Onset >6 months previously; Able to walk 10 m independently; MMSE >21; Average walking speed: 0.81 m/s (0.39); 4 R hemiparetic; 4 L hemiparetic | |
| Thaut et al., | X | Huntington's | 27 | 13/14 | 47 ± 10.7 | 31–68 | Mean duration of disease: 7 ± 3.3 years; Mean disability score: 1.28 ± 0.65 Mean chorea score: 1.37 ± 0.61 | |
| Roerdink et al., | X | X | Stroke | 11 | 7/4 | U | 42–71 | 8 R hemiparetic; 3 L hemiparetic; Able to walk 3 min without walking aid |
| Dotov et al., | X | X | Healthy subjects | 10 | 6/4 | U | 56–74 | / |
| Parkinson's | 19 | U | 37–78 | H&Y: median stage 2; Median disease duration: 6 years (range: 3–20) | ||||
| McIntosh et al., | X | X | Healthy subjects | 18 | U | 39–79 | / | |
| Parkinson's (ON) | 21 | 15/6 | 71 ± 4 | U | Mean disease duration: 7.5; H&Y II: 8; H&Y III: 10; H&Y IV: 3 | |||
| Parkinson's (Off) | 10 | 6/4 | 73 ± 3 | U | Mean disease duration: 7.8; H&Y II: 4; H&Y III: 6; H&Y IV: 1 | |||
| Hove et al., | X | X | Healthy subjects | 10 | 4/6 | 72 ± 5 | U | / |
| Parkinson's | 20 | 8/12 | 69.2 ± 7.7 | U | Mean duration disease: 3.6 years; H&Y: 2–3; ON medication | |||
| Nomura et al., | X | X | Healthy subjects | 18 | 16/2 | 24.7 ± 2.7 | U | / |
| Parkinson's | 20 | 8/12 | 69.2 ± 7.7 | U | Mean duration disease: 3.6 years; H&Y: 2–3; ON medication | |||
N/A, Not applicable; R, Right; L, Left; U, unknown; MMSE, Mini Mental State Examination; H&Y, Hoeln and Yahr; m, meters; m/s , meters/second.
Descriptive overview concerning applications of the auditory stimuli.
| Dickstein and Plax, | X | X | 60, 110, and 150 bpm | 3 speeds | Metronome signals by a computer | ∧ | ||
| Marmelat et al., | X | X | Co-efficient of variation of 0.5, 1, 1.5, and 2% | Exp1: isochronous metronome at 4 pacing conditions | Metronome signals by a computer | ∧∧ | ||
| Fractal scaling of H0.2 H0.5, H0.6, and H0.9 | Exp2: fractal metronome at 4 fractal scaling conditions | |||||||
| Roerdink et al., | X | X | 77.5, 85, 92.5, 100, 107.5, 115, and 112.5% (of PWS) | 7 speeds | Metronome signals by a computer | ∧ | ||
| Terrier and Deriaz, | X | X | x0.7, x1.3 of PWS | 2 speeds | Electronic metronome | ∧ | ||
| Buhmann et al., | X | X | PWS | 3 conditions of music: activating, neutral and relaxing music | D-jogger* | ∧∧∧ | ||
| Leow et al., | X | X | X | +15% of PWS | 1 speed | Audacity (Free software Inc., Boston, USA) and Beatroot | ∧∧∧ | |
| Leow et al., | X | X | X | +22.5% of PWS | 2 conditions: 20 min, 3 trials each of high groove and low groove music | Audacity (Free software Inc., Boston, USA) | ∧∧∧ | |
| Mendonça et al., | X | X | X | PWS, +5, +10,−5,−10% of PWS | 5 speeds | Matlab generated script | ∧ | |
| Cha et al., | X | X | PWS,−10%, +10%, and +20% of PWS | 4 speeds | Electronic metronome | ∧ | ||
| Pelton et al., | X | X | / | 5 100-pulse trials: each trial consisted of 20 metronome pulses without phase shift at baseline, The phase shifts were positive shifts of 20% of the inter-pulse interval, followed by 4 sections of 20 pulses with one phase shift occurring at an unpredictable time | Audible metronome pulses | ∧∧ | ||
| Thaut et al., | X | X | X | −10%, +20% of PWS | 2 speeds | Electronic metronome and MIDI | ∧ | |
| Roerdink et al., | X | X | PWS | 1 speed with a positive and negative shift phase of 60° | Computer-produced rhythmic acoustic pacing | ∧∧ | ||
| Hove et al., | X | X | U | 3 conditions: WalkMate**, fixed RAS tempo and silent control | Matlab generated scripts to control for tempo shifts | ∧ | ||
| Nomura et al., | X | X | U | 3 conditions: WalkMate**, fixed RAS tempo and silent control | Matlab generated scripts to control for tempo shifts | ∧ | ||
| McIntosh et al., | X | U | PWS and +10% of PWS | 2 speeds of instrumental music in Renaissance style in 2/4 m | synthesizer/sequencer | ∧∧ | ||
| Dotov et al., | X | X | X | +10% | Three variability conditions: no variation, biological variation (long range correlation), non-biological variation (random) | Music: 4 highly familiar musical marches, and amplitude modulated noise | ∧∧ | |
Exp, Experiment; PWS, preferred walking speed; U, Unknown; MIDI, Musical Instrument Digital Interface.Legend of study aims: Change in speeds affecting movement.
Measurements of auditory-motor coupling and synchronization during walking: definitions, formulas, and interpretations.
| Tempo | Tempo is a term that refers to the basic tempo of audio or movement and is typically expressed in number of steps or beats per min (SPM/BPM). |
| Relative phase angle | This is a measure of the timing of the footfall relative to the closest beat. |
| Resultant vector length | This measure expresses the coherence or stability of the relative phase angles over time. If the distribution of the relative phase angles over time is steep, it results in a high resultant vector length (max value 1). If the distribution of the relative phase angle over time is not steep but broad or multimodal, it results in a low resultant vector length (min value 0). |
| Asynchrony | This parameter is a measure of the timing expressed in milliseconds (ms) between the footfall and beat instants, i.e., the |
| Tempo matching accuracy | This parameter indicates the extent to which the overall tempo of the footfalls matches the overall tempo of the beats. |
| Detrended Fluctuation analysis (DFA) | The DFA is a common mathematical method to analyse the dynamics of non-stationary time series. More specifically, it characterizes the fluctuation dynamics of the time series through looking into its scaling component alpha (Chen et al., |
| The y- coordinate of the straight line segments is denoted by | |
Figure 2An illustration to measure auditory-motor coupling during entrainment. (A) Demonstrates a strong auditory-motor coupling. (B) Demonstrates a weak (non-existent) auditory-motor coupling.
A summary of spatiotemporal gait parameters, auditory-motor coupling, and synchronization parameters measured across studies.
| Dickstein and Plax, | x | ||||||||||||||
| Marmelat et al., | x | ||||||||||||||
| Roerdink et al., | x | x | x | ||||||||||||
| Terrier and Deriaz, | x | x | x | x | x | x | |||||||||
| Buhmann et al., | x | x | x | x | |||||||||||
| Leow et al., | x | x | x | x | |||||||||||
| Leow et al., | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | ||||||||
| Mendonça et al., | x | ||||||||||||||
| Cha et al., | x | x | x | x | x | ||||||||||
| Pelton et al., | x | x | x | x | |||||||||||
| Thaut et al., | x | x | x | x | |||||||||||
| Roerdink et al., | x | x | x | x | x | ||||||||||
| Hove et al., | x | x | |||||||||||||
| Nomura et al., | x | x | |||||||||||||
| McIntosh et al., | x | x | x | x | |||||||||||
| Dotov et al., | x | x | x | ||||||||||||
Figure 3Illustration of a scenario; where the walker entrains his/her steps to the beats in the auditory stimuli, and switches between in-phase (0°) and anti-phase (180°) attractors.