Coordination tending towards an anti-phase relationship determines greater sway reduction during entrainment with a simulated partner.

The increased risk of falls in the older aged population demands the development of assistive robotic devices capable of effective balance support. For the development and increased user acceptance of such devices, which provide balance support in a human-like way, it is important to understand the simultaneous occurrence of entrainment and sway reduction in human-human interaction. However, sway reduction has not been observed yet during a human touching an external, continuously moving reference, which rather increased human body sway. Therefore, we investigated in 15 healthy young adults (27.20±3.55 years, 6 females) how different simulated sway-responsive interaction partners with different coupling modes affect sway entrainment, sway reduction and relative interpersonal coordination, as well as how these human behaviours differ depending on the individual body schema accuracy. For this, participants were lightly touching a haptic device that either played back an average pre-recorded sway trajectory ("Playback") or moved based on the sway trajectory simulated by a single-inverted pendulum model with either a positive (Attractor) or negative (Repulsor) coupling to participant's body sway. We found that body sway reduced not only during the Repulsor-interaction, but also during the Playback-interaction. These interactions also showed a relative interpersonal coordination tending more towards an anti-phase relationship, especially the Repulsor. Moreover, the Repulsor led to the strongest sway entrainment. Finally, a better body schema contributed to a reduced body sway in both the "reliable" Repulsor and the "less reliable" Attractor mode. Consequently, a relative interpersonal coordination tending more towards an anti-phase relationship and an accurate body schema are important to facilitate sway reduction.

Sex differences in the association of postural control with indirect measures of body representations.

Besides anthropometric variables, high-order body representations have been hypothesised to influence postural control. However, this has not been directly tested before. Moreover, some studies indicate that sex moderates the relationship of anthropometry and postural control. Therefore, as a proof of concept we investigated the association of body representations with postural control as well as the influence of participants' sex/gender. Body image measures were assessed with a figural drawing task. Body schema was tested by a covert and an overt task. Body sway was measured during normal bipedal quiet standing with eyes closed (with/without neck extended). Statistical analysis consisted of hierarchical multiple linear regressions with the following regression steps: (1) sensory condition, (2) sex/gender, (3) age, (4) anthropometry, (5) body schema, (6) body image, (7) sex/gender-interactions. Across 36 subjects (19 females), body schema was significantly associated with body sway variability and open-loop control, in addition to commonly known influencing factors, such as sensory condition, gender, age and anthropometry. While in females, also body image dissatisfaction substantially was associated with postural control, this was not the case in males. Sex differences and possible causes why high-order body representations may influence concurrent sensorimotor control of body sway are discussed.

Assessment of Balance Instability by Wearable Sensor Systems During Postural Transitions.

Several studies have demonstrated beneficial effects of real-time biofeedback for improving postural control. However, the application for daily activities, which also include postural transitions, is still limited. One crucial aspect is the time point of providing feedback, and thus its reliability. This might depend on the sensor system used, but also on how the threshold is defined. This study investigates which wearable sensor system and what kind of threshold is more reliable in a situation of a postural transition.To this end, we compared three sensor systems regarding their accuracy in timing in a stable and unstable postural transition in 16 healthy young adults: a multiple Inertial Measurement Unit system (IMU), a pressure Insoles System (IS), and a combination of both systems (COMB). Further, we contrasted two threshold parameters for each system: a Quiet Standing-based threshold (QSth) and a Limits of Stability-based threshold (LoSth).Two-way repeated measures ANOVAs and Wilcoxon tests (α = 0.05) indicated highest accuracy in the COMB LoSth, though with small differences to the IS LoSth. The LoSth showed more accurate timing than the QSth, especially in medio-lateral direction for IS and COMB.Consequently, for providing a reliable timing for a potential biofeedback applied by a wearable device in everyday life situations applications should focus on pressure insoles and a functional stability threshold, such as the LoS-based threshold.

Immediate Effects of Vibrotactile Biofeedback Instructions on Human Postural Control.

Vibrotactile biofeedback can improve balance and consequently be helpful in fall prevention. However, it remains unclear how different types of stimulus presentations affect not only trunk tilt, but also Center of Pressure (CoP) displacements, and whether an instruction on how to move contributes to a better understanding of vibrotactile feedback.Based on lower back tilt angles (L5), we applied individualized multi-directional vibrotactile feedback to the upper torso by a haptic vest in 30 healthy young adults. Subjects were equally distributed to three instruction groups (attractive - move in the direction of feedback, repulsive - move in the opposite direction of feedback & no instruction - with attractive stimuli). We conducted four conditions with eyes closed (feedback on/off, Narrow Stance with head extended, Semi-Tandem stance), with seven trials of 45s each. For CoP and L5, we computed Root Mean Square (RMS) of position/angle and standard deviation (SD) of velocity, and for L5 additionally, the percentage in time above threshold. The analysis consisted of mixed model ANOVAs and t-tests (α-level: 0.05).In the attractive and repulsive groups feedback significantly decreased the percentage above threshold (p<0.05). Feedback decreased RMS of L5, whereas RMS of CoP and SD of velocity in L5 and COP increased (p<0.05). Finally, an instruction on how to move contributed to a better understanding of the vibrotactile biofeedback.