4.5 Article

Age-related joint moment characteristics during normal gait and successful reactive-recovery from unexpected slip perturbations

期刊

GAIT & POSTURE
卷 30, 期 3, 页码 276-281

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2009.04.005

关键词

Slips and falls; Joint moment; Inverse dynamics; Locomotion; Aging; Falls

资金

  1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [UR6/CCU617968, K01-01-107450]
  2. Whitaker Foundation Biomedical Engineering Research
  3. Div Of Information & Intelligent Systems
  4. Direct For Computer & Info Scie & Enginr [1547466] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The objective of the current study was to investigate the effects of aging on 3D lower extremity joint moments during successful reactive-recovery from unexpected slips. Unexpected slips were induced by having participants walk over a slippery floor surface. Successful reactive-recovery trials from nine young and nine elderly participants were identified and analyzed. Three-dimensional inverse dynamics were implemented to calculate reactive joint moments at the ankle, knee, and hip joints. Peak joint moment magnitude and the speed of peak joint moment generation were used to describe the balance recovery strategies from unexpected slips. Results indicated significantly higher peak joint moments in recovery than in normal walking for both the young and elderly. Meanwhile, during reactive-recovery, the elderly were found to utilize both frontal and sagittal joint moments while the younger adults relied primarily on sagittal joint moment. It was concluded that the ankle and knee joints were critical in controlling sagittal plane motion disturbance, while the hip joint was mainly responsible for stabilizing upper body balance in the frontal plane. This study confirmed age-related differences in joint moment generation during unexpected slips. Additionally, implementing 3D analysis is recommended in future slips and falls research. Published by Elsevier B.V.

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

4.5
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