Fast muscle responses to an unexpected foot-in-hole scenario, evoked in the context of prior knowledge of the potential perturbation

This study investigated the effect of prior knowledge of the potential loss of support during walking on muscle responses to the potential perturbation. Four conditions were tested; non-instructed control (NC), non-instructed perturbed (NP), instructed control (IC) and instructed perturbed (IP). Participants were perturbed by having them step into a hidden hole (8.5 cm) in a walkway during the NP and IP trials. Participants had no prior knowledge of the potential perturbation under the NC and NP conditions, but under the instructed conditions, participants were informed that there might be a hole in the walkway. A cautious landing strategy was observed in the IC trials. The participants exhibited flat-footed landings (plantar angle: NC: 13.7 ± 2.8°; IC: 8.5 ± 5.2°) and a prolonged double support phase (NC: 138 ± 18 ms; IC: 161 ± 17 ms) when they had prior knowledge of the possible hole. When the participants encountered a hole, we saw triggering of fast muscle responses in the ipsilateral plantarflexors and knee extensor, as well as in the contralateral dorsiflexors and knee flexors. This pattern was interpreted as a stop walking synergy. The opposite muscle activation pattern, which was thought of as a resume walking synergy, was induced when no hole was presented and actual foot contact occurred at the expected instant. The latencies between the onsets of muscle responses and the expected heel contact were shorter under the IP condition than under the NP condition (ipsilateral soleus: NP: 78 ± 13 ms, IP: 64 ± 14 ms; contralateral biceps femoris: NP: 94 ± 25 ms; IP: 76 ± 17 ms). Our results demonstrate that reactive muscle responses to perturbations depend on the anticipatory state with respect to potential perturbations.

[1]  C. MacKinnon,et al.  The effect of task instruction on the excitability of spinal and supraspinal reflex pathways projecting to the biceps muscle , 2006, Experimental Brain Research.

[2]  J. V. van Dieën,et al.  Effects of conflicting constraints and age on strategy choice in stepping down during gait. , 2009, Gait & posture.

[3]  Ian M Franks,et al.  Precues enable multiple response preprogramming: evidence from startle. , 2009, Psychophysiology.

[4]  A. Patla,et al.  Strategies for dynamic stability during locomotion on a slippery surface: effects of prior experience and knowledge. , 2002, Journal of neurophysiology.

[5]  James S. Frank,et al.  Control of dynamic stability during adaptation to gait termination on a slippery surface , 2010, Experimental Brain Research.

[6]  P. Duncan,et al.  Influence of prior knowledge on automatic and voluntary postural adjustments in healthy and hemiplegic subjects. , 1987, Physical therapy.

[7]  A. Prochazka,et al.  Predictive and reactive tuning of the locomotor CPG. , 2007, Integrative and comparative biology.

[8]  C. MacKinnon,et al.  Preparation of anticipatory postural adjustments prior to stepping. , 2007, Journal of neurophysiology.

[9]  A. Patla,et al.  Role of the unperturbed limb and arms in the reactive recovery response to an unexpected slip during locomotion. , 2003, Journal of neurophysiology.

[10]  Mark D. Grabiner,et al.  The presence of an obstacle influences the stepping response during induced trips and surrogate tasks , 2005, Experimental Brain Research.

[11]  S C Wearing,et al.  The effect of visual targeting on ground reaction force and temporospatial parameters of gait. , 2000, Clinical biomechanics.

[12]  Jacques Duysens,et al.  Hitting a support surface at unexpected height during walking induces loading transients. , 2009, Gait & posture.

[13]  J. Duysens,et al.  Significance of load receptor input during locomotion: a review. , 2000, Gait & posture.

[14]  J. Duysens,et al.  Reflex Responses in the Lower Leg following Landing Impact on an Inverting and Non‐Inverting Platform , 2003, The Journal of physiology.

[15]  Masahiro Shinya,et al.  Corrective postural responses evoked by completely unexpected loss of ground support during human walking. , 2009, Gait & posture.

[16]  R. Stein,et al.  Analysis of rapid stopping during human walking. , 1998, Journal of neurophysiology.

[17]  M. Bobbert,et al.  Changes in walking pattern caused by the possibility of a tripping reaction. , 2001, Gait & posture.

[18]  Sergiy Yakovenko,et al.  The neuromechanical tuning hypothesis. , 2007, Progress in brain research.

[19]  Jaap H van Dieën,et al.  Balance control in stepping down expected and unexpected level changes. , 2007, Journal of biomechanics.

[20]  Jaap H van Dieën,et al.  EMG modulation in anticipation of a possible trip during walking in young and older adults. , 2006, Journal of electromyography and kinesiology : official journal of the International Society of Electrophysiological Kinesiology.

[21]  Yi-Chung Pai,et al.  Feedforward adaptations are used to compensate for a potential loss of balance , 2002, Experimental Brain Research.

[22]  M. Mcdonagh,et al.  Interaction of pre‐programmed control and natural stretch reflexes in human landing movements , 2002, The Journal of physiology.

[23]  J. Duysens,et al.  Muscle reflexes and synergies triggered by an unexpected support surface height during walking. , 2007, Journal of neurophysiology.

[24]  Volker Dietz Evidence for a Load Receptor Contribution to the Control of Posture and Locomotion , 1998, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[25]  J. Duysens,et al.  Fast responses to stepping on an unexpected surface height depend on intact large-diameter nerve fibers: a study on Charcot-Marie-Tooth type 1A disease. , 2009, Journal of neurophysiology.

[26]  J. Duysens,et al.  The effects of an auditory startle on obstacle avoidance during walking , 2008, The Journal of physiology.