Publication
Distinctive phases and variability of vibration-induced postural reactions highlighted by center of pressure analysis
Publisher:
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Date:
23-01-2023
DOI:
10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0280835
Abstract: The vibration-induced postural reaction paradigm (VIB-PR) offers a unique way for investigating sensorimotor control mechanisms. Measures of VIB-PR are usually calculated from the whole VIB period, yet recent evidence proposed that distinctive mechanisms are likely at play between the early vs. later phases of the postural reaction. The present work verified if spatiotemporal analyses of center of pressure (COP) displacements can detect differences between these early/later phases of VIB-PR. Also, we further characterized the intra/inter-in idual variability of COP measurements, since the underlying variability of VIB-PR remains largely unexplored. Twenty young volunteers realized two experimental conditions of bipodal stance with eyes closed: (i) bilateral VIB of tibialis anterior (TIB) and (ii) Achilles’ (ACH) tendons. Each condition consisted of five trials and lasted 30 s as follows: 10 s baseline, 10 s VIB and 10 s post-VIB. Linear COP variables (antero-posterior (AP) litude & velocity) were computed for both VIB and post-VIB periods using the following time-windows: early 2 s, the later 8 s and the whole 10 s duration. Intra- and inter-in idual variability were respectively estimated using the standard error of the measurement and the coefficient of variation. Both variability metrics were obtained using five vs. the first three trials. Significant contrasts were found between time-windows for both VIB and post-VIB periods. COP variables were generally higher during the early 2 s phase compared to the later 8 s phase for both TIB [mean difference between 8 s– 2 s phases: Amplitude AP = -1.11 ± 1.14 cm during VIB and -2.99 ± 1.31 during post-VIB Velocity AP = -1.17 ± 0.86 cm/s during VIB and -3.13 ± 1.31 cm/s during post-VIB] and ACH tendons [Amplitude AP = -0.37 ± 0.98 cm during VIB and -3.41 ± 1.20 during post-VIB Velocity AP = -0.31 ± 0.59 cm/s during VIB and -3.89 ± 1.52 cm/s during post-VIB]. Most within- and between-subject variability scores were below 30% and using three instead of five trials had no impact on variability. VIB-PR patterns were quite similar within a same person, but variable behaviors were observed between in iduals during the later phase. Our study highlights the relevance of identifying and separately analyzing distinct phases within VIB-PR patterns, as well as characterizing how these patterns vary at the in idual level.