Tetsuya Hirono1,2, Tome Ikezoe3, Masashi Taniguchi3, Momoko Yamagata3, Kosuke Miyakoshi3, Jun Umehara3,4, Noriaki Ichihashi3. 1. Human Health Sciences, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, 53 Shogoin-Kawahara-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan. hirono.tetsuya.56x@st.kyoto-u.ac.jp. 2. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, 5-3-1 Kojimachi, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, 102-0083, Japan. hirono.tetsuya.56x@st.kyoto-u.ac.jp. 3. Human Health Sciences, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, 53 Shogoin-Kawahara-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan. 4. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, 5-3-1 Kojimachi, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, 102-0083, Japan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study was aimed at determining the relationship between ankle plantar flexor force steadiness and postural control during single leg standing on stable and unstable platforms. METHODS: For the thirty-three healthy participants, force steadiness, at target torques of 5%, 20%, and 50% of the maximum voluntary torque (MVT) of the ankle plantar flexors, was measured. Force steadiness was calculated as the coefficient of variation of force. Single leg standing on stable and unstable platforms was performed using the BIODEX Balance System SD. The standard deviation of the anteroposterior center of pressure (COP) displacements was measured as the index for postural control. During both measurements, muscle activities of the soleus were collected using surface electromyography. RESULTS: On the stable platform, the COP fluctuation significantly correlated with force steadiness at 5% of MVT (r = 0.512, p = 0.002). On the unstable platform, the COP fluctuation significantly correlated with force steadiness at 20% of MVT (r = 0.458, p = 0.007). However, the extent of muscle activity observed for a single leg standing on both stable and unstable platforms was significantly greater than the muscle activity observed while performing force steadiness tasks at 5% and 20% of MVT, respectively. CONCLUSION: Postural stability during single leg standing on stable and unstable platforms may be related to one's ability to maintain constant torque at 5% and 20% of MVT regardless of the muscle activity. These results suggest that the required abilities to control muscle force differ depending on the postural control tasks.
PURPOSE: This study was aimed at determining the relationship between ankle plantar flexor force steadiness and postural control during single leg standing on stable and unstable platforms. METHODS: For the thirty-three healthy participants, force steadiness, at target torques of 5%, 20%, and 50% of the maximum voluntary torque (MVT) of the ankle plantar flexors, was measured. Force steadiness was calculated as the coefficient of variation of force. Single leg standing on stable and unstable platforms was performed using the BIODEX Balance System SD. The standard deviation of the anteroposterior center of pressure (COP) displacements was measured as the index for postural control. During both measurements, muscle activities of the soleus were collected using surface electromyography. RESULTS: On the stable platform, the COP fluctuation significantly correlated with force steadiness at 5% of MVT (r = 0.512, p = 0.002). On the unstable platform, the COP fluctuation significantly correlated with force steadiness at 20% of MVT (r = 0.458, p = 0.007). However, the extent of muscle activity observed for a single leg standing on both stable and unstable platforms was significantly greater than the muscle activity observed while performing force steadiness tasks at 5% and 20% of MVT, respectively. CONCLUSION: Postural stability during single leg standing on stable and unstable platforms may be related to one's ability to maintain constant torque at 5% and 20% of MVT regardless of the muscle activity. These results suggest that the required abilities to control muscle force differ depending on the postural control tasks.
Entities:
Keywords:
Force fluctuation; Force steadiness; Plantar flexor; Postural control; Single leg standing
Authors: Roger M Enoka; Evangelos A Christou; Sandra K Hunter; Kurt W Kornatz; John G Semmler; Anna M Taylor; Brian L Tracy Journal: J Electromyogr Kinesiol Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 2.368
Authors: James Day; Leah R Bent; Ingvars Birznieks; Vaughan G Macefield; Andrew G Cresswell Journal: J Neurophysiol Date: 2017-01-11 Impact factor: 2.714
Authors: Anna Margherita Castronovo; Natalie Mrachacz-Kersting; Andrew James Thomas Stevenson; Ales Holobar; Roger Maro Enoka; Dario Farina Journal: J Neurophysiol Date: 2018-07-05 Impact factor: 2.714
Authors: Serena F Carville; Mark C Perry; Olga M Rutherford; I Christopher H Smith; Di J Newham Journal: Eur J Appl Physiol Date: 2006-09-16 Impact factor: 3.346
Authors: Mitchell Turner; Alvaro Reyes; Tim Rankin; Danielle Bartlett; Gabriel Trajano; Tim Pulverenti; Travis Cruickshank Journal: Am J Transl Res Date: 2021-12-15 Impact factor: 4.060
Authors: Chai-Wei Lin; Yu-Lin You; Yi-An Chen; Tzu-Chan Wu; Cheng-Feng Lin Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-12-03 Impact factor: 3.390