نوع مقاله: مقاله کامل پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد، گروه هوش مصنوعی و محاسبات نرم، دانشکده‌ی علوم ریاضی و رایانه، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران

2 استادیار، گروه هوش مصنوعی و محاسبات نرم، دانشکده‌ی علوم ریاضی و رایانه، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران

3 استادیار، گروه فیزیوتراپی، دانشکده‌ی علوم پزشکی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران

10.22041/ijbme.2018.94617.1407

چکیده

تعادل، یکی از فاکتورهای حیاتی در بسیاری از فعالیت­های روزمره، مانند حرکت می‌باشد. ایستادن روی یک صفحه­ی ناپایدار، به تلاش مستمر و تقویت سیستم عصبی-اسکلتی نیازمند است. درگیری شناختی و اغتشاش سطح اتکا در ایستادن، از عوامل موثر بر از دست دادن تعادل هستند. هدف از انجام این مطالعه، بررسی توانایی تامین پایداری افراد در هنگام ایستادن در سطوح مختلف فیزیکی و شناختی می‌باشد. بدین منظور، دوازده زن جوان و سالم برای شرکت در شش حالت از آزمون (سه  حالت سطح اتکا در دو حالت درگیری شناختی) انتخاب شدند. سه حالت سطح اتکا، شامل ایستادن روی سطح صاف زمین، ایستادن روی یک صفحه­ی ناپایدار با حمایت فنر و ایستادن روی یک صفحه­ی ناپایدار بدون حمایت فنر، می‌باشد. درگیری شناختی نیز در دو سطح، با سوال توجه پایدار و بدون آن، از طریق نمایش روی پرده و پاسخ­دهی با کلیدهای بله/خیر صورت گرفت. از روش تحلیل حرکت به وسیله­ی یک دوربین با سرعت بالا و نشان‌گرهای فعال در صفحه­ی سهمی، برای اندازه­گیری زوایای مفصلی استفاده شد. برای بررسی کمی پایداری، معیارهای خطی (مانند طول مسیر و جذر میانگین مربعی) و معیارهای غیرخطی (مانند بی­نظمی تقریبی و بعد فراکتالی) محاسبه شدند. نتایج به دست آمده نشان دادند که در بررسی سازوکار مفاصل، در راستای تامین پایداری، مچ پا، در سطحی بالاتر از دو مفصل زانو و ران، تاثیرگذار می­باشد. صرفا بی­نظمی تقریبی، به تفاوت معنی­داری بین سطوح مختلف دشواری فیزیکی، منتهی شده است. هم‌چنین، هم‌کاری بین مفاصل در دشواری متوسط سطح اتکا (صفحه­ی ناپایدار با حمایت فنر) بیش‌تر مشاهده شد. عدم تطابق میزان دشواری بین آزمون­های فیزیکی و شناختی، منجر به کم‌رنگ شدن نقش سوال­های شناختی در این آزمایش شده است. از این‌رو، برای بروز اثر درگیری شناختی در ایستادن، باید بین دشواری وظیفه­ی فیزیکی و شناختی، تناسبی برقرار باشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Effects of Cognitive Interference and Type of Support Surface on Postural Stability: A Biomechanical Analysis

نویسندگان [English]

  • Maedeh Najafi Ashtiani 1
  • Mohammad Reza Asghari Oskoei 2
  • Mohammed Najafi Ashtiani 3

1 M.Sc. Student, Department of Artificial Intelligence, Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Sciences, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Artificial Intelligence, Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Sciences, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran

3 Assistant Professor, Department of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

چکیده [English]

Balance is essential for human daily activities. Standing on an unstable platform requires continuous effort of the neuro-musculoskeletal system. Cognitive interference and support surface perturbation may cause loss of balance. The aim of this study is to evaluate the ability of stability provision of individuals while standing in different levels of postural and cognitive difficulty. To this end, twelve healthy young women were participated in six levels (three levels of support surface × two levels of cognitive intereference). Three levels support surface were standing on a firm surface, unstable platform surface with and without spring support. Two levels of attentional cognitive involvements were considered with or without questions by presenting on a curtain and asking to response by a yes/no joystick. Motion analysis was used to measure joint angles by capturing body movements in the sagittal plane by a high-speed camera and active markers. To quantitatively investigate the stability, two linear (pathlength, root mean square) and two nonlinear (approximate entropy, fractal dimension) metrtics were calculated. Results showed that the ankle mechanism plays a more prominent role in keeping balance than the knee and hip joint mechanisms. Merely the approximate entropy indicated significant differences between the postural difficulty levels. Also, the mediocre level of support surface perturbation (spring-supported unstable platform) revealed multi-joint collaboration between the mechanisms. The inconsistence between postural and cognitive difficulty levels might vanish the role of cognitive questions in the present study. Therefore, considering consistent postural and cognitive tasks may highlight the effects of cognitive involvements on standing.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • balance
  • stability
  • support surface
  • cognitive interference
  • joint mechanisms

[1]     M. Mazaheri, P. Coenen, M. Parnianpour, H. Kiers, J.H. van Dieën, “Low back pain and postural sway during quiet standing with and without sensory manipulation: a systematic review,” Gait Posture, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 12-22, Jan. 2013.

[2]     D.G.E. Robertson, G. Caldwell, J. Hamill J, G. Kamen G, S. Whittlesey, “Research methods in biomechanics,” Human Kinetics, 2004.

[3]     A. Mansfield A, B. Maki, “Are age-related impairments in change in-support balance reactions dependent on the method of balance perturbation?” J. Biomech., vol. 42, no. 8, pp. 1023-1031, May. 2009.

[4]     P.B. De Freitas, C.A. Knight, J.A. Barela, “Postural reactions following forward platform perturbation in young, middle-age, and old adults,” J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol., vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 693-700, Jan. 2010.

[5]     A. Shumway-Cook, M.H. Woollacott, “Motor control: theory and practical applications,” Williams & Wilkins, 1995.

[6]     S. Hwang, P. Agada, T. Kiemel, J.J. Jeka, “Identification of the unstable human postural control system,” Front. Syst. Neurosci., vol. 10, pp. 10, Mar. 2016.

[7]     F.B. Horak, J. Kluzik, F. Hlavacka, “Velocity dependence of vestibular information for postural control on tilting surfaces,” J. Neurophysiol., vol. 116, no. 3, pp. 1468-1479, Sep. 2016.

[8]     A. Shumway-Cook, F.B. Horak, “Assessing the influence of sensory interaction on balance: suggestion from the field,” Phys. Ther., vol. 66, no. 10, pp. 1548-1450, Oct. 1986.

[9]     S. Oliaei, M.N. Ashtiani, K. Azma, S. Saidi, M.R. Azghani, “Effects of postural and cognitive difficulty levels on the standing of healthy young males on an unstable platform,” Acta Neurobiol. Exp., vol. 78, no. 1, pp. 60-68, Jan. 2018.

[10] N. Vuillerme, H. Vincent, “How performing a mental arithmetic task modify the regulation of centre of foot pressure displacements during bipedal quiet standing,” Exp. Brain Res., vol. 169, no. 1, pp. 130-134, Feb. 2006.

[11] A.J. Strang, J. Haworth, M. Hieronymus, M. Walsh, L.J. Smart, “Structural changes in postural sway lend insight into effects of balance training, vision, and support surface on postural control in a healthy population,” Eur. J. Appl. Physiol., vol. 111, no. 7, pp. 1485-1495, Jul. 2011.

[12] C.J. Hausbeck, M.J. Strong, L.S. Tamkei, W.A. Leonard, K.I. Ustinova, “The effect of additional hand contact on postural stability perturbed by a moving environment,” Gait Posture, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 509-513, Apr. 2009.

[13] Y.P. Ivanenko, Y.S. Levik, V.L. Talis, V.S. Gurfinkel, “Human equilibrium on unstable support: the importance of feet-support interaction,” Neurosci. Lett., vol. 235, no. 3, pp. 109-112, Oct. 1997.

[14] V. Amori, M. Petrarca, F. Patane, E. Castelli, P. Cappa, “Upper body balance control strategy during continuous 3D postural perturbation in young adults,” Gait Posture, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 19-25, Jan. 2015.

[15] A. Lamontagne, C.L. Richards, F. Malouin, “Coactivation during gait as an adaptive behavior after stroke,” J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol., vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 407-415, Dec. 2000.

[16] L.M. Nashner, G. McCollum, “The organization of human postural movements: a formal basis and experimental synthesis,” Behav. Brain Sci., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 135-150, Mar. 1985.

[17] F.B. Horak, L.M. Nashner, “Central programming of postural movements: adaptation to altered support-surface configurations,” J. Neurophysiol., vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 1369-1381, Jun. 1986.

[18] F.B. Horak, L.M. Nashner, H.C. Diener, “Postural strategies associated with somatosensory and vestibular loss,” Exp. Brain Res., vol. 82, no. 1, pp. 167-177, Aug. 1990.

[19] W.L. Hsu, J.P. Scholz, G. Schoner, J.J. Jeka, T. Kiemel, “Control and estimation of posture during quiet stance depends on multijoint coordination,” J. Neurophysiol., vol. 97, no. 4, pp. 3024-3035, Apr. 2007.

[20] M. Schmid, S. Conforto, L. Lopez, T. D’Alessio, “Cognitive load affects postural control in children,” Exp. Brain Res., vol. 179, no. 3, pp. 375-385, May. 2007.

[21] Z. Shorer, B. Becker, T. Jacobi-Polishook, L. Oddsson, I. Melzer, “Postural control among children with and without attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in single and dual conditions,” Eur. J. Pediatr., vol. 171, no. 7, pp. 1087-1094, Jul. 2012.

[22] S.F. Donker, M. Roerdink, A.J. Greven, P.J. Beek, “Regularity of center-of-pressure trajectories depends on the amount of attention invested in postural control,” Exp. Brain Res., vol. 181, no. 1, pp. 1, Jul. 2007.

[23] J.D. Holmes, M.E. Jenkins, A.M. Johnson, S.G. Adams, S.J. Spaulding, “Dual-task interference: the effects of verbal cognitive tasks on upright postural stability in Parkinson's disease,” Parkinson Dis., vol. 2010, 696492, Feb. 2010.

[24] M.N. Ashtiani, M.R. Azghani, “Nonlinear dynamics analysis of the human balance control subjected to physical and sensory perturbations,” Acta Neurobiol. Exp., vol. 77, no. 3, pp. 168-175, Jan. 2017.

[25] R. Creath, T. Kiemel, F. Horak, R. Peterka, J.J. Jeka, “A unified view of quiet and perturbed stance: simultaneous co-existing excitable modes,” Neurosci. Lett., vol. 377, no. 2, pp. 75-80, May. 2005.

[26] G. Cimadoro, C. Paizis, G. Alberti, N. Babault, “Effects of different unstable supports on EMG activity and balance,” Neurosci. Lett., vol. 548, pp. 228-232, Aug. 2013.

[27] I.D. Loram, C.N. Maganaris, M. Lakie, “Human postural sway results from frequent, ballistic bias impulses by soleus and gastrocnemius,” J. Physiol., vol. 564, no. 1, pp. 295-311, Apr. 2005.

[28] M.N. Ashtiani, M.R. Azghani, “Open- and closed-loop responses of joint mechanisms in perturbed stance under visual and cognitive interference,” Biomed. Signal Process. Control., vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 1-8, Feb. 2018.

[29] A. Bottaro, Y. Yasutake, T. Nomura, M. Casadio, P. Morasso, “Bounded stability of the quiet standing posture: an intermittent control model,” Human Mov. Sci., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 473-495, Jun. 2008.

[30] J.W. Blaszczyk, W. Klonowski, “Postural stability and fractal dynamics,” Acta Neurobiol. Exp., vol. 61, pp. 105-112, Jan. 2001.

[31] T. Deschamps, O. Beauchet, C. Annweiler, C. Cornu, J.B. Mignardot, “Postural control and cognitive decline in older adults: position versus velocity implicit motor strategy,” Gait Posture, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 628-630, Jan. 2014.

[32] I. Melzer, N. Benjuya, J. Kaplanski, “Age-related changes of postural control: effect of cognitive tasks,” Gerontol., vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 189-94, Jan. 2001.

[33] A. Bragin, J. Engel Jr, C.L. Wilson, I. Fried, G. Buzsaki, “High-frequency oscillations in human brain,” Hippocampus, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 137-142, Jan, 1999.