Identify the Alteration of Balance Control and Risk of Falling in Stroke Survivors During Obstacle Crossing Based on Kinematic Analysis

Na Chen, Xiang Xiao, Huijing Hu, Ying Chen, Rong Song, Le Li, Na Chen, Xiang Xiao, Huijing Hu, Ying Chen, Rong Song, Le Li

Abstract

This study aims to compare the differences in the kinematic characteristics of crossing obstacles of different heights between stroke survivors and age-matched healthy controls and to identify the changes of balance control strategy and risk of falling. Twelve stroke survivors and twelve aged-matched healthy controls were recruited. A three-dimensional motion analysis system and two force plates were used to measure the kinematic and kinetic data during crossing obstacles with heights of 10, 20, and 30% leg length. The results showed that during leading and trailing limb clearance, (AP) center of mass (COM) velocities of the stroke group were smaller than those of the healthy controls for all heights. The decreased distances between COM and center of pressure (COP) in the AP direction during the both trailing and leading limb support period were also found between stroke survivors and healthy controls for all heights. The COM velocity and COM-COP distance significantly correlated with the lower limb muscle strength. In addition, stroke survivors showed greater lateral pelvic tilt, greater hip abduction, and larger peak velocity in the medio-lateral (ML) direction. There was a positive correlation between the COM-COP distance in the AP direction and the clinical scales. These results might identify that the stroke survivors used a conservative strategy to negotiate the obstacles and control balance due to a lack of muscle strength. However, the abnormal patterns during obstacle crossing might increase the risk of falling. The findings could be used to design specific rehabilitation training programs to enhance body stability, reduce energy cost, and improve motion efficiency.

Keywords: balance control; gait; kinematics; obstacle crossing; stroke.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
(A) The sketch map of the gait cycle of obstacle crossing, including Trailing limb supporting period (TLP) and leading limb supporting period (LLP). TOD (the horizontal distance between the trailing toe (trailing limb is in contact with the floor) and the obstacle before crossing the obstacle), TOC (the vertical distance between the toe of leading toe and obstacle when the toe is over the obstacle) as well as HOD (the horizontal distance between the leading heel (leading limb is in contact with the floor at this time) and the obstacle after crossing the obstacle) were also demonstrated. (B) The sketch map of the COM-COP distance at anterior–posterior (AP) and medio-lateral (ML) direction.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Typical trials of the kinematic behavior of the pelvis at (A) Anterior-Posterior (AP) direction, (B) Medio-Literal (ML) direction and (C) Rotation, and hip joint of (D) Flexion/Extension, (E) Abduction/Adduction, (F) Rotation, as well as (G) knee joint Flexion/Extension of the trailing and the leading limb in a patient (female, age 63) and a healthy subject (female, age 62) during the crossing stride sub-phases. See Supplementary Material for all the data trials of stroke and healthy subjects.
Figure 3
Figure 3
The balance measurements in the AP direction (Mean and SD). (A) The velocity at the leading limb clearance. (B) The velocity at the trailing limb clearance. (C) The COM-COP distance during TLP. (D) COM-COP distance during LLP. *Reflects the significant difference between groups, #Reflects the significant difference between heights. The error bar represents 1 SD.
Figure 4
Figure 4
The balance measurements in the ML direction (Mean and SD). (A) The velocity at the peak 1. (B) The velocity at the peak 2. (C) The velocity at the peak 3. (D) COM-COP distance during TLP. (E) COM-COP distance during LLP. *Reflects the significant difference between groups, #reflects the significant difference between heights. The error bar represents 1 SD.
Figure 5
Figure 5
The correlation between the clinical scales and the distance between COM-COP in the AP direction of different periods when crossing the 10% leg length height obstacle. (A) The correlation between the BBS scores and the distance of COM-COP during TLP. (B) The correlation between the BBS scores and the distance of COM-COP during LLP. (C) The correlation between the FMA scores and the distance of COM-COP during TLP. (D) The correlation between the FMA scores and the distance of COM-COP during LLP.

References

    1. Said CM, Goldie PA, Patla AE, Sparrow WA, Martin KE. Obstacle crossing in subjects with stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. (1999) 80:1054–9. 10.1016/S0003-9993(99)90060-6
    1. Den Otter AR, Geurts AC, De HM, Mulder T, Duysens J. Step characteristics during obstacle avoidance in hemiplegic stroke. Exp Brain Res. (2005) 161:180–92. 10.1007/s00221-004-2057-0
    1. Jørgensen HS, Nakayama MH, Raaschou HO, Vive-Larsen MJ, Støier MM, Md TSO. Outcome and time course of recovery in stroke. Part II: Time course of recovery The copenhagen stroke study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. (1995) 76:399–405. 10.1016/S0003-9993(95)80567-2
    1. Sattin RW. Falls among older persons: a public health perspective. Ann Rev Public Health. (1992) 13:489. 10.1146/annurev.pu.13.050192.002421
    1. Said CM, Galea MP, Lythgo N. People with stroke who fail an obstacle crossing task have a higher incidence of falls and utilize different gait patterns compared with people who pass the task. Phys Ther. (2013) 93:334–44. 10.2522/ptj.20120200
    1. Lu TW, Chen HL, Chen SC. Comparisons of the lower limb kinematics between young and older adults when crossing obstacles of different heights. Gait Posture. (2006) 23:471–9. 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2005.06.005
    1. Chen HL, Lu TW. Comparisons of the joint moments between leading and trailing limb in young adults when stepping over obstacles. Gait Posture. (2006) 23:69–77. 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2004.12.001
    1. Chen HL, Yen HC, Liu MW, Liu HC, Lu TW. Comparisons of the inter-joint coordination between older and young adults during obstacle-crossing. Gait Posture. (2009) 30:S106–7. 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2009.08.158
    1. Kerrigan DC, Frates EP, Rogan S, Riley PO. Hip hiking and circumduction: quantitative definitions. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. (2000) 79:247–52. 10.1097/00002060-200005000-00006
    1. Lu TW, Yen HC, Chen HL, Hsu WC, Chen SC, Hong SW, et al. . Symmetrical kinematic changes in highly functioning older patients post-stroke during obstacle-crossing. Gait Posture. (2010) 31:511–6. 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2010.02.012
    1. van Swigchem R, van Duijnhoven HJ, Den BJ, Geurts AC, Weerdesteyn V. Deficits in motor response to avoid sudden obstacles during gait in functional walkers poststroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. (2013) 27:230–9. 10.1177/1545968312462070
    1. Chou LS, Kaufman KR, Hahn ME, Brey RH. Medio-lateral motion of the center of mass during obstacle crossing distinguishes elderly individuals with imbalance. Gait Posture. (2003) 18:125–33. 10.1016/S0966-6362(02)00067-X
    1. Hahn ME, Chou LS. Age-related reduction in sagittal plane center of mass motion during obstacle crossing. J Biomech. (2004) 37:837–44. 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2003.11.010
    1. Hof AL, Gazendam MGJ, Sinke WE. The condition for dynamic stability. J Biomech. (2005) 38:1–8. 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.03.025
    1. Said CM, Goldie PA, Patla AE, Culham E, Sparrow WA, Morris ME. Balance during obstacle crossing following stroke. Gait Posture. (2008) 27:23–30. 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2006.12.009
    1. Gladstone DJ, Danells CJ, Black SE. The fugl-meyer assessment of motor recovery after stroke: a critical review of its measurement properties. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. (2002) 16:232–40. 10.1177/154596802401105171
    1. Mancini M, Horak FB. The relevance of clinical balance assessment tools to differentiate balance deficits. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. (2010) 46:239–48.
    1. Corriveau H, Hébert R, Raîche M, Prince F. Evaluation of postural stability in the elderly with stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. (2004) 85:1095–101. 10.1016/j.apmr.2003.09.023
    1. Bohannon RW. Test-retest reliability of hand-held dynamometry during a single session of strength assessment. Phys Ther. (1986) 66:206–9. 10.1093/ptj/66.2.206
    1. Dorsch S, Ada L, Canning CG, Al-Zharani M, Dean C. The strength of the ankle dorsiflexors has a significant contribution to walking speed in people who can walk independently after stroke: an observational study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. (2012) 93:1072–6. 10.1016/j.apmr.2012.01.005
    1. Ma C, Chen N, Mao Y, Huang D, Song R, Li L. Alterations of muscle activation pattern in stroke survivors during obstacle crossing. Front Neurol. (2017) 8:70. 10.3389/fneur.2017.00070
    1. Chou LS, Draganich LF. Increasing obstacle height and decreasing toe-obstacle distance affect the joint moments of the stance limb differently when stepping over an obstacle. Gait Posture. (1998) 8:186–204. 10.1016/S0966-6362(98)00034-4
    1. Jian Y, Winter DA, Ishac MG, Gilchrist L. Trajectory of the body COG and COP during initiation and termination of gait. Gait Posture. (1993) 1:9–22. 10.1016/0966-6362(93)90038-3
    1. Kim CM, Eng JJ. The relationship of lower-extremity muscle torque to locomotor performance in people with stroke. Phys Ther. (2003) 83:49.
    1. Said CM, Goldie PE, Sparrow WA, Patla AE, Morris ME. Control of lead and trail limbs during obstacle crossing following stroke. Phys Ther. (2005) 85:413.
    1. Slawinski J, Pradon D, Bensmail D, Roche N, Zory R. Energy cost of obstacle crossing in stroke patients. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. (2014) 93:1044–50. 10.1097/PHM.0000000000000122
    1. Vitório R, Pieruccinifaria F, Stella F, Gobbi S, Gobbi LT. Effects of obstacle height on obstacle crossing in mild Parkinson's disease. Gait Posture. (2010) 31:143–6. 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2009.09.011
    1. Chou LS, Kaufman KR, Walker-Rabatin AE, Brey RH, Basford JR. Dynamic instability during obstacle crossing following traumatic brain injury. Gait Posture. (2004) 20:245–54. 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2003.09.007

Source: PubMed

3
订阅