Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 329

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 80 of the 80 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Age‐dependent variations in the directional sensitivity of balance corrections and compensatory arm movements in man

Open access
Allum, J. H. J., Carpenter, M. G., Honegger, F., Adkin, A. L., Bloem, B. R.·2002·The Journal of Physiology
DOI 10.1113/jphysiol.2001.015644
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

We investigated the effects of ageing on balance corrections induced by sudden stance perturbations in different directions. Effects were examined in biomechanical and electromyographic (EMG) recordings from a total of 36 healthy subjects divided equally into three age groups (20–34, 35–55 and 60–75 years old). Perturbations consisted of six combinations of support‐surface roll (laterally) and pitch (forward‐backward) each with 7.5 deg amplitude (2 pure pitch, and 4 roll and pitch) delivered randomly. To reduce stimulus predictability further and to investigate scaling effects, perturbations were at either 30 or 60 deg s−1. In the legs, trunk and arms we observed age‐related changes in balance corrections. The changes that appeared in the lower leg responses included smaller stretch reflexes in soleus and larger reflexes in tibialis anterior of the elderly compared with the young. For all perturbation directions, onsets of balance correcting responses in these ankle muscles were delayed by 20–30 ms and initially had smaller amplitudes (between 120–220 ms) in the elderly. This reduced early activity was compensated by increased lower leg activity after 240 ms. These EMG changes were paralleled by comparable differences in ankle torque responses, which were initially (after 160 ms) smaller in the elderly, but subsequently greater (after 280 ms). Findings in the middle‐aged group were generally intermediate between the young and the elderly groups. Comparable results were obtained for the two different stimulus velocities. Stimulus‐induced trunk roll, but not trunk pitch, changed dramatically with increasing age. Young subjects responded with early large roll movements of the trunk in the opposite direction to platform roll. A similarly directed but reduced amplitude of trunk roll was observed in the middle‐aged. The elderly had very little initial roll modulation and also had smaller stretch reflexes in paraspinals. Balance‐correcting responses (over 120–220 ms) in gluteus medius and paraspinals were equally well tuned to roll in the elderly, as in the young, but were reduced in amplitude. Onset latencies were delayed with age in gluteus medius muscles. Following the onset of trunk and hip balance corrections, trunk roll was in the same direction as support‐surface motion for all age groups and resulted in overall trunk roll towards the fall side in the elderly, but not in the young. Protective arm movements also changed with age. Initial arm roll movements were largest in the young, smaller in the middle aged, and smallest in the elderly. Initial arm roll movements were in the same direction as initial trunk motion in the young and middle aged. Thus initial roll arm movements in the elderly were directed oppositely to those in the young. Initial pitch motion of the arms was similar across age groups. Subsequent arm movements were related to the amplitude of deltoid muscle responses which commenced at 100 ms in the young and 20–30 ms later in the elderly. These deltoid muscle responses preceded additional arm roll motion which left the arms directed ‘downhill’ (in the direction of the fall) in the elderly, but ‘uphill’ (to counterbalance motion of the pelvis) in the young. We conclude that increased trunk roll stiffness is a key biomechanical change with age. This interferes with early compensatory trunk movements and leads to trunk displacements in the direction of the impending fall. The reversal of protective arm movements in the elderly may reflect an adaptive strategy to cushion the fall. The uniform delay and amplitude reduction of balance‐correcting responses across many segments (legs, hips and arms) suggests a neurally based alteration in processing times and response modulation with age. Interestingly, the elderly compensated for these ‘early abnormalities’ with enlarged later responses in the legs, but no similar adaptation was noted in the arms and trunk. These changes with age provide an insight into possible mechanisms underlying falls in the elderly.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1113/jphysiol.2001.015644

Cites

80 of 80 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 329

Metadata

Authors
Allum, J. H. J., Carpenter, M. G., Honegger, F., Adkin, A. L., & Bloem, B. R.
Venue
The Journal of Physiology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2002-07
Volume
542
Issue
2
Pages
643-663
ISSN
  • 0022-3751 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-7793
DOI
10.1113/jphysiol.2001.015644
OpenAlex
W2161722146
Cited by
329
References
80
FWCI
28.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.