| Literature DB >> 36236626 |
Mariusz Konieczny1, Przemysław Domaszewski2, Elżbieta Skorupska3, Zbigniew Borysiuk1, Kajetan J Słomka4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intermuscular synchronization is one of the fundamental aspects of maintaining a stable posture and is of great importance in the aging process. This study aimed to assess muscle synchronization and postural stabilizer asymmetry during quiet standing and the limits of stability using wavelet analysis. Intermuscular synchrony and antagonistic sEMG-sEMG (surface electromyography) coherence asymmetry were evaluated in the tibialis anterior and soleus muscles.Entities:
Keywords: aging; intermuscular coherence; limit of stability; surface electromyography
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36236626 PMCID: PMC9573255 DOI: 10.3390/s22197527
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.847
Results of ANOVA analysis of significance of Within Subjects Effects differences in delta band (0–5 Hz) and beta band (15–35 Hz).
| F |
| η²p | |
|---|---|---|---|
| delta band (0–5 Hz) | |||
| Task | 6.78 | 0.013 | 0.14 |
| Task × GROUP | 0.39 | 0.536 | 0.01 |
| Side | 0.03 | 0.867 | 0.00 |
| Side × GROUP | 0.19 | 0.669 | 0.00 |
| Task × Side | 0.01 | 0.919 | 0.00 |
| Task × Side × GROUP | 0.00 | 0.994 | 0.00 |
| GROUP | 0.13 | 0.717 | 0.00 |
| beta band (15–35 Hz) | |||
| Task | 10.41 | 0.003 | 0.04 |
| Task × GROUP | 1.25 | 0.270 | 0.00 |
| Side | 0.59 | 0.446 | 0.00 |
| Side × GROUP | 0.14 | 0.708 | 0.00 |
| Task × Side | 0.45 | 0.509 | 0.00 |
| Task × Side × GROUP | 0.08 | 0.774 | 0.00 |
| GROUP | 10.60 | 0.002 | 0.21 |
F—F-test value (ANOVA); p—p-value—level of statistical significance (set at 0.05); η²p—partial eta squared—determines the effect size of variables in ANOVA models.
Figure 1Illustration of the asymmetry of the logarithmic delta band frequency data in the (qs/lean) tasks in the comparison of the two groups.
Figure 2Illustration of the asymmetry of the logarithmic beta band frequency data in the (qs/lean) tasks in the comparison of the two groups.
Results of the significance analysis of differences of the R2b parameter, between the study group of young and older people, analyzed by Independent Samples T-Test.
| T |
| Cohen’s d | |
|---|---|---|---|
| R2b | −3.34 | 0.002 | −1.01 |
T—Student’s t-test value; p—p-value—level of statistical significance (set at 0.05); Cohen’s d—effect size ratio.
Results of ANOVA analysis of significance of Within Subjects Effects differences in SD of COP displacements.
| F |
| η²p | |
|---|---|---|---|
| task | 5.77 | 0.021 | 0.12 |
| task × GROUP | 2.47 | 0.124 | 0.06 |
| GROUP | 2.59 | 0.115 | 0.06 |
Descriptive statistics of the studied COP and coherence parameters in both study groups.
| Group | Mean ± SD | |
|---|---|---|
| Old | Young | |
| R2b | 60.50 ± 17.70 | 81.90 ± 24.20 |
| SD qs | 4.41 ± 2.88 | 4.09 ± 1.25 |
| SD lean | 4.19 ± 1.36 | 5.40 ± 1.67 |
| SOL/R-TIB/R 0–5 Hz qs | 0.53 ± 0.11 | 0.52 ± 0.11 |
| SOL/R-TIB/R 0–5 Hz lean | 0.48 ± 0.08 | 0.49 ± 0.12 |
| SOL/L -TIB/L 0–5 Hz qs | 0.52 ± 0.10 | 0.54 ± 0.15 |
| SOL/L-TIB/L 0–5 Hz lean | 0.47 ± 0.09 | 0.50 ± 0.12 |
| SOL/R-TIB/R 15–35 Hz qs | 0.30 ± 0.07 | 0.35 ± 0.07 |
| SOL/R-TIB/R 15–35 Hz lean | 0.33 ± 0.04 | 0.36 ± 0.05 |
| SOL/L-TIB/L 15–35 Hz qs | 0.30 ± 0.03 | 0.36 ± 0.08 |
| SOL/L-TIB/L 15–35 Hz lean | 0.33 ± 0.03 | 0.37 ± 0.08 |
Figure 3Graphical illustration of the asymmetry (left/right leg) of the delta and beta band coherence oscillations in the tasks (qs/leaning) in both groups.