A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Hip proprioceptive feedback influences the control of mediolateral stability during human walking. | LitMetric

Hip proprioceptive feedback influences the control of mediolateral stability during human walking.

J Neurophysiol

Division of Physical Therapy, College of Health Professions, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina; and Ralph H. Johnson Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Charleston, South Carolina

Published: October 2015

Active control of the mediolateral location of the feet is an important component of a stable bipedal walking pattern, although the roles of sensory feedback in this process are unclear. In the present experiments, we tested whether hip abductor proprioception influenced the control of mediolateral gait motion. Participants performed a series of quiet standing and treadmill walking trials. In some trials, 80-Hz vibration was applied intermittently over the right gluteus medius (GM) to evoke artificial proprioceptive feedback. During walking, the GM was vibrated during either right leg stance (to elicit a perception that the pelvis was closer mediolaterally to the stance foot) or swing (to elicit a perception that the swing leg was more adducted). Vibration during quiet standing evoked leftward sway in most participants (13 of 16), as expected from its predicted perceptual effects. Across the 13 participants sensitive to vibration, stance phase vibration caused the contralateral leg to be placed significantly closer to the midline (by ∼2 mm) at the end of the ongoing step. In contrast, swing phase vibration caused the vibrated leg to be placed significantly farther mediolaterally from the midline (by ∼2 mm), whereas the pelvis was held closer to the stance foot (by ∼1 mm). The estimated mediolateral margin of stability was thus decreased by stance phase vibration but increased by swing phase vibration. Although the observed effects of vibration were small, they were consistent with humans monitoring hip proprioceptive feedback while walking to maintain stable mediolateral gait motion.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4600962PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/jn.00551.2015DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

phase vibration
16
proprioceptive feedback
12
control mediolateral
12
hip proprioceptive
8
mediolateral gait
8
gait motion
8
quiet standing
8
vibration
8
feedback walking
8
vibrated leg
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!