The Kinematics and Strategies of Recovery Steps During Lateral Losses of Balance in Standing at Different Perturbation Magnitudes in Older Adults with Varying History of Falls
Overview
Affiliations
Background: Step-recovery responses are critical in preventing falls when balance is lost unexpectedly. We investigated the kinematics and strategies of balance recovery in older adults with a varying history of falls.
Methods: In a laboratory study, 51 non-fallers (NFs), 20 one-time fallers (OFs), and 12 recurrent-fallers (RFs) were exposed to random right/left unannounced underfoot perturbations in standing of increasing magnitude. The stepping strategies and kinematics across an increasing magnitude of perturbations and the single- and multiple-step threshold trials, i.e., the lowest perturbation magnitude to evoke single step and multiple steps, respectively, were analyzed. Fall efficacy (FES) and self-reported lower-extremity function were also assessed.
Results: OFs had significantly lower single- and multiple-step threshold levels than NFs; the recovery-step kinematics were similar. Surprisingly, RFs did not differ from NFs in either threshold. The kinematics in the single-step threshold trial in RFs, however, showed a significant delay in step initiation duration, longer step duration, and larger center of mass (CoM) displacement compared with NFs and OFs. In the multiple-step threshold trial, the RFs exhibited larger CoM displacements and longer time to fully recover from balance loss. Interestingly, in the single-stepping trials, 45% of the step-recovery strategies used by RFs were the loaded-leg strategy, about two times more than OFs and NFs (22.5 and 24.2%, respectively). During the multiple-stepping trials, 27.3% of the first-step recovery strategies used by RFs were the loaded-leg strategy about two times more than OFs and NFs (11.9 and 16.4%, respectively), the crossover stepping strategy was the dominated response in all 3 groups (about 50%). In addition, RFs reported a lower low-extremity function compared with NFs, and higher FES in the OFs.
Conclusions: RFs had impaired kinematics during both single-step and multiple-step recovery responses which was associated with greater leg dysfunction. OFs and NFs had similar recovery-step kinematics, but OFs were more likely to step at lower perturbation magnitudes suggesting a more "responsive" over-reactive step response related from their higher fear of falling and not due to impaired balance abilities. These data provide insight into how a varying history of falls might affect balance recovery to a lateral postural perturbation.
Trial Registration: This study was registered prospectively on November 9th, 2011 at clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT01439451 ).
Zhu R, Hung T, Lam F, Li J, Luo Y, Sun J Bioengineering (Basel). 2025; 12(1).
PMID: 39851340 PMC: 11762401. DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering12010066.
Hezel N, Buchner T, Becker C, Bauer J, Sloot L, Steib S Front Sports Act Living. 2024; 6:1462177.
PMID: 39465209 PMC: 11502312. DOI: 10.3389/fspor.2024.1462177.
Batcir S, Berdichevsky Y, Bachner Y, Lubovsky O, Debi R, Melzer I Gerontology. 2024; 70(7):689-700.
PMID: 38657580 PMC: 11239142. DOI: 10.1159/000535968.
Rasmussen C, Mun S, Ouattas A, Walski A, Curtze C, Hunt N J Exp Biol. 2024; 227(6).
PMID: 38456285 PMC: 11006391. DOI: 10.1242/jeb.246700.
Melo-Alonso M, Murillo-Garcia A, Leon-Llamas J, Villafaina S, Gomez-Alvaro M, Morcillo-Parras F J Clin Med. 2024; 13(2).
PMID: 38276141 PMC: 10816706. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13020635.