Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27228075›Full record

ArticleClinical biomechanics (Bristol, Avon)2016

Kinematic and behavioral analyses of protective stepping strategies and risk for falls among community living older adults.

Woei-Nan Bair, Michelle G Prettyman, Brock A Beamer, Mark W Rogers

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical biomechanics (Bristol, Avon), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Woei-Nan BairDepartment of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation Science, School of Medicine, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA.
Michelle G PrettymanDepartment of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation Science, School of Medicine, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA.
Brock A BeamerDivision of Gerontology & Geriatric Medicine, VAMC GRECC, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA.
Mark W RogersDepartment of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation Science, School of Medicine, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA. Electronic address: MRogers@som.umaryland.edu.

Funding

University of Maryland Claude D. Pepper Older Americans Independence Center (UM-OAIC)P30AG028747 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE · PI ALICE S. RYAN · 2006 to 2026
$28.9M
Lateral Stability and Falls in AgingR01AG029510 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE · PI ROGERS, MARK W · 2009 to 2010
$1.2M
NIA NIH HHS P30 AG028747NIA NIH HHS R01 AG029510
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProtective stepping evoked by externally applied lateral perturbations reveals balance deficits underlying falls. However, a lack of comprehensive information about the control of different stepping strategies in relation to the magnitude of perturbation limits understanding of balance control in relation to age and fall status. The aim of this study was to investigate different protective stepping strategies and their kinematic and behavioral control characteristics in response to different magnitudes of lateral waist-pulls between older fallers and non-fallers.

methodsFifty-two community-dwelling older adults (16 fallers) reacted naturally to maintain balance in response to five magnitudes of lateral waist-pulls. The balance tolerance limit (BTL, waist-pull magnitude where protective steps transitioned from single to multiple steps), first step control characteristics (stepping frequency and counts, spatial-temporal kinematic, and trunk position at landing) of four naturally selected protective step types were compared between fallers and non-fallers at- and above-BTL.

findingsFallers took medial-steps most frequently while non-fallers most often took crossover-back-steps. Only non-fallers varied their step count and first step control parameters by step type at the instants of step initiation (onset time) and termination (trunk position), while both groups modulated step execution parameters (single stance duration and step length) by step type. Group differences were generally better demonstrated above-BTL.

interpretationFallers primarily used a biomechanically less effective medial-stepping strategy that may be partially explained by reduced somato-sensation. Fallers did not modulate their step parameters by step type at first step initiation and termination, instances particularly vulnerable to instability, reflecting their limitations in balance control during protective stepping.

Indexed as

Accidental FallsAgedAged, 80 and overBiomechanical PhenomenaFemaleHumansMaleMotor SkillsPostural BalanceRiskWalkingBalanceFallsPostural perturbationProtective stepping

Identifiers

PMID27228075
PMCPMC5568553

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.