Literature DB >> 7965833

Proprioceptive, visual and vestibular thresholds for the perception of sway during standing in humans.

R Fitzpatrick1, D I McCloskey.   

Abstract

1. Thresholds for the perception of postural sway induced by gentle perturbations were determined for five normal standing subjects. In this context we understand 'perception' to mean 'able to give a subjective report'. The thresholds for the perception of movements that were equivalent to sway in velocity and amplitude were determined when the available sensory input was limited to only one, or a pair, of the vestibular, visual, and proprioceptive systems. To examine vestibular inputs alone, vision was excluded and the whole body was moved with the ankles in a fixed position. To examine visual inputs alone, the body was kept stationary and a 'room' was moved around the subjects to simulate the relative visual-field movement that occurs during standing. To limit the available sensory input to proprioception from the legs, subjects were held stationary and balanced a load that was equivalent to their own body using their ankles. In this situation, perturbations were applied to the 'equivalent body' and these could only be perceived from the resulting ankle movements. Thresholds for perceiving ankle movements were also determined in the same posture, but with the leg muscles bearing no load. 2. The thresholds for the perception of sway during standing were very small, typically 0.003 rad at a velocity of 0.001 rad s-1, and even smaller movements were perceived as the mean velocity of the sway increased up to 0.003 rad s-1. No difference was found between the thresholds for perceiving forward sway and backward sway. Eye closure during standing did not affect the threshold for perceiving sway. 3. When sensory input was limited to proprioception from the legs, the thresholds for the perception of passive ankle movements were equivalent to the thresholds for the perception of sway during standing with all sensory inputs available. When the leg muscles were relaxed, the thresholds for perceiving ankle movements increased approximately twofold. 4. The visual thresholds for perceiving movement were higher than the proprioceptive thresholds at slower velocities of movement, but there was no difference at higher velocities. 5. Both the proprioceptive and visual thresholds were sufficiently small to allow perception of the sway that was recorded when the subjects stood normally in a relaxed manner. In contrast, the vestibular thresholds were an order of magnitude greater than the visual or proprioceptive thresholds and above the largest sway movements that were recorded during normal standing.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7965833      PMCID: PMC1155655          DOI: 10.1113/jphysiol.1994.sp020240

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Physiol        ISSN: 0022-3751            Impact factor:   5.182


  37 in total

1.  The relation between discrimination and sensitivity in the perception of motion in depth.

Authors:  K I Beverley; D Regan
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1975-07       Impact factor: 5.182

2.  Recruitment order of human spindle endings in isometric voluntary contractions.

Authors:  D Burke; K E Hagbarth; N F Skuse
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1978-12       Impact factor: 5.182

3.  Subjective detection of vertical acceleration: a velocity-dependent response?

Authors:  G M Jones; L R Young
Journal:  Acta Otolaryngol       Date:  1978 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.494

4.  The contribution of muscle afferents to kinaesthesia shown by vibration induced illusions of movement and by the effects of paralysing joint afferents.

Authors:  G M Goodwin; D I McCloskey; P B Matthews
Journal:  Brain       Date:  1972       Impact factor: 13.501

5.  Detections of movements imposed on finger, elbow and shoulder joints.

Authors:  L A Hall; D I McCloskey
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1983-02       Impact factor: 5.182

6.  Displacement thresholds for unidirectional and oscillatory movement.

Authors:  R P Scobey; C A Johnson
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1981       Impact factor: 1.886

7.  Interpretation of perceived motor commands by reference to afferent signals.

Authors:  S C Gandevia; D I McCloskey
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1978-10       Impact factor: 5.182

8.  Looming detectors in the human visual pathway.

Authors:  D Regan; K I Beverley
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1978       Impact factor: 1.886

9.  Do spindle afferents monitor joint position in man? A study with active position holding.

Authors:  A B Vallbo; M Hulliger; E Nordh
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  1981-01-05       Impact factor: 3.252

10.  Muscle spindle activity in man during standing.

Authors:  D Burke; G Eklund
Journal:  Acta Physiol Scand       Date:  1977-06
View more
  140 in total

1.  Effects of galvanic vestibular stimulation during human walking.

Authors:  R C Fitzpatrick; D L Wardman; J L Taylor
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1999-06-15       Impact factor: 5.182

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.  Individual characteristics in occupational accidents due to imbalance: a case-control study of the employees of a railway company.

Authors:  G C Gauchard; N Chau; C Touron; L Benamghar; D Dehaene; PhP Perrin; J-M Mur
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 4.402

4.  Effects of galvanic vestibular stimulation on human posture and perception while standing.

Authors:  Daniel L Wardman; Janet L Taylor; Richard C Fitzpatrick
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2003-07-15       Impact factor: 5.182

5.  Maintaining spatial body alignment on a rotating platform by means of active counter-circling: role of vestibular and podokinesthetic afferents.

Authors:  Volker Diekmann; Reinhart Jürgens; Wolfgang Becker
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2004-08-06       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  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

7.  Recruitment of motor units in the medial gastrocnemius muscle during human quiet standing: is recruitment intermittent? What triggers recruitment?

Authors:  Taian M M Vieira; Ian D Loram; Silvia Muceli; Roberto Merletti; Dario Farina
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2011-10-12       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  Structural changes in postural sway lend insight into effects of balance training, vision, and support surface on postural control in a healthy population.

Authors:  Adam J Strang; Joshua Haworth; Mathias Hieronymus; Mark Walsh; L James Smart
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2010-12-17       Impact factor: 3.078

9.  Community-dwelling adults with a history of falling report lower perceived postural stability during a foam eyes closed test than non-fallers.

Authors:  E Anson; S Studenski; P J Sparto; Y Agrawal
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2019-01-02       Impact factor: 1.972

10.  Skin Cooling and Force Replication at the Ankle in Healthy Individuals: A Crossover Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Daniela Pacheco dos Santos Haupenthal; Marcos de Noronha; Alessandro Haupenthal; Caroline Ruschel; Guilherme S Nunes
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2015-03-11       Impact factor: 2.860

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.