Literature DB >> 7615030

The effects of visual input on open-loop and closed-loop postural control mechanisms.

J J Collins1, C J De Luca.   

Abstract

In an earlier posturographic investigation (Collins and De Luca 1993) it was proposed that open-loop and closed-loop control mechanisms are involved in the regulation of undisturbed, upright stance. In this study, stabilogram-diffusion analysis was used to examine how visual input affects the operational characteristics of these control mechanisms. Stabilogram-diffusion analysis leads to the extraction of repeatable center-of-pressure (COP) parameters that can be directly related to the resultant steady-state behavior and functional interaction of the neuromuscular mechanisms underlying the maintenance of erect posture. Twenty-five healthy male subjects (aged 19-30 years) were included in the study. An instrumented force platform was used to measure the time-varying displacements of the COP under each subject's feet during quiet standing. The subjects were tested under eyes-open and eyes-closed conditions. The COP trajectories were analyzed as one-dimensional and two-dimensional random walks, according to stabilogram-diffusion analysis. Using this technique, it was found that visual input affects the performance of the postural control system in one of two different ways--either it significantly modifies the steady-state behavior of the open-loop postural control mechanisms, or it significantly alters the characteristics of the other closed-loop feedback mechanisms that are involved in balance control. This result is interpreted as an indication that the visual system is integrated into the postural control system in one of two different ways. The experimental population was roughly evenly divided between these two schemes. For the first group (13 of 25 subjects), visual input principally caused a decrease in the "effective" stochastic activity of the open-loop control mechanisms in both the mediolateral and anteroposterior directions. For the second group (12 of 25 subjects), visual input caused an increase in the effective stochastic activity and uncorrelated behavior of the closed-loop control mechanisms in the anteroposterior direction only. On the basis of these results, it is hypothesized that visual input, in both schemes, serves to decrease the stiffness of the musculoskeletal system. In the former case, this may be accomplished by decreasing the level of muscular activity across the joints of the lower limb, whereas, in the latter case, reduced stiffness may be achieved by reducing the gain(s) of the other postural feedback mechanisms, i.e., the proprioceptive and/or vestibular systems. Using stabilogram-diffusion analysis, it was also found that the two groups of subjects behaved similarly under eyes-closed conditions.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7615030     DOI: 10.1007/BF00241972

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


  33 in total

1.  Upright, correlated random walks: A statistical-biomechanics approach to the human postural control system.

Authors:  J. J. Collins; C. J. De Luca
Journal:  Chaos       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 3.642

2.  Postural sway in normals and atactic patients: analysis of the stabilising and destabilizing effects of vision.

Authors:  J Dichgans; K H Mauritz; J H Allum; T Brandt
Journal:  Agressologie       Date:  1976

3.  Differential effects of retinal target displacement, changing size and changing disparity in the control of anterior/posterior and lateral body sway.

Authors:  W Paulus; A Straube; S Krafczyk; T Brandt
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  [Spectrum study of lateral and antero-posterior spontaneous motions of the center of gravity in man in the standing position].

Authors:  J Leroux; J B Baron; G Bizzo; J C Bessineton; C Gueguen; R Noto; M Pacifici
Journal:  Agressologie       Date:  1973-09

5.  The influence of foot position on standing balance.

Authors:  R L Kirby; N A Price; D A MacLeod
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 2.712

6.  Open-loop and closed-loop control of posture: a random-walk analysis of center-of-pressure trajectories.

Authors:  J J Collins; C J De Luca
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Parametric analysis of dynamic postural responses.

Authors:  S A Werness; D J Anderson
Journal:  Biol Cybern       Date:  1984       Impact factor: 2.086

8.  Visual contribution to rapid motor responses during postural control.

Authors:  L Nashner; A Berthoz
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  1978-07-14       Impact factor: 3.252

9.  Control scheme governing concurrently active human motor units during voluntary contractions.

Authors:  C J De Luca; R S LeFever; M P McCue; A P Xenakis
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1982-08       Impact factor: 5.182

10.  Visual stabilization of posture. Physiological stimulus characteristics and clinical aspects.

Authors:  W M Paulus; A Straube; T Brandt
Journal:  Brain       Date:  1984-12       Impact factor: 13.501

View more
  72 in total

1.  Analysis of postural sway using entropy measures of signal complexity.

Authors:  A M Sabatini
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 2.602

2.  Human balancing of an inverted pendulum: is sway size controlled by ankle impedance?

Authors:  I D Loram; S M Kelly; M Lakie
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2001-05-01       Impact factor: 5.182

3.  Evidence for reflex and perceptual vestibular contributions to postural control.

Authors:  Ann M Bacsi; James G Colebatch
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  The role of plantar cutaneous sensation in unperturbed stance.

Authors:  Peter F Meyer; Lars I E Oddsson; Carlo J De Luca
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2004-02-14       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Asymmetry of recurrent dynamics as a function of postural stance.

Authors:  Adam C King; Zheng Wang; Karl M Newell
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-06-13       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Effect of three different jaw positions on postural stability during standing.

Authors:  Ahmad H Alghadir; Hamayun Zafar; Zaheen A Iqbal
Journal:  Funct Neurol       Date:  2015 Jan-Mar

7.  Differences in preferred reference frames for postural orientation shown by after-effects of stance on an inclined surface.

Authors:  Joann Kluzik; Fay B Horak; Robert J Peterka
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2005-01-15       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Multisensory information for postural control: sway-referencing gain shapes center of pressure variability and temporal dynamics.

Authors:  Sean Clark; Michael A Riley
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Manually controlled human balancing using visual, vestibular and proprioceptive senses involves a common, low frequency neural process.

Authors:  Martin Lakie; Ian D Loram
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2006-09-07       Impact factor: 5.182

10.  Fatigue-related modulation of low-frequency common drive to motor units.

Authors:  Ing-Shiou Hwang; Yen-Ting Lin; Chien-Chun Huang; Yi-Ching Chen
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2020-04-15       Impact factor: 3.078

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.