4.7 Article

Noise-enhanced balance control in patients with diabetes and patients with stroke

期刊

ANNALS OF NEUROLOGY
卷 59, 期 1, 页码 4-12

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ana.20670

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIA NIH HHS [AG 08812] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NICHD NIH HHS [HD 37880] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NIDDK NIH HHS [DK 60295] Funding Source: Medline
  4. PHS HHS [H133P990003] Funding Source: Medline
  5. EUNICE KENNEDY SHRIVER NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH &HUMAN DEVELOPMENT [R01HD037880] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  6. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DIABETES AND DIGESTIVE AND KIDNEY DISEASES [R43DK060295, R44DK060295] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  7. NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING [P60AG008812, P30AG008812] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Somatosensory function declines with diabetic neuropathy and often with stroke, resulting in diminished motor performance. Recently, it has been shown that input noise can enhance human sensorimotor function. The goal of this study was to investigate whether subsensory mechanical noise applied to the soles of the feet via vibrating insoles can be used to improve quiet-standing balance control in 15 patients with diabetic neuropathy and 15 patients with stroke. Sway data of 12 healthy elderly subjects from a previous study on vibrating insoles were added for comparison. Methods. Five traditional sway parameters and three sway parameters from random-walk analysis were computed for each trial (no noise or noise). Results: Application of noise resulted in a statistically significant reduction in each of the eight sway parameters in the subjects with diabetic neuropathy, the subjects with stroke, and the elderly subjects. We also found that higher levels of baseline postural sway in sensory-impaired individuals was correlated with greater improvements in balance control with input noise. Interpretation This work indicates that noise-based devices could ameliorate diabetic and stroke impairments in balance control.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据