ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2025
Synchronization of passive interpersonal light touch and body control responses during walking.
Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPassive interpersonal light touch (PILT) provides postural coordination cues to the body of a contact receiver through the fingertips of a contact provider. However, the manner in which the fingertip information of the PILT contact provider affects the gait performance of the contact receiver remains unclear. We aimed to investigate body control responses such as trunk sway and smoothness to PILT during walking to clarify the synchronization of fingertip–body movements in the context of the experience the PILT provider in body manipulation.
methodsIn total, 17 healthy volunteers (21.4 ± 1.1 years old, 9 females) performed 10-m walk tests under three conditions: walking without touch (NT), walking with PILT administered by contact provider with extensive rehabilitation experience in manual body manipulation (PILTE), and walking with PILT administered by contact provider with no experience (PILTN). A force sensor on the middle finger of the contact provider and inertial sensors on the third lumbar and seventh cervical spinous processes of the contact receiver were used to gather data pertaining to contact force, direction of motion, walking speed, triaxial root mean square, harmonic ratio (HR), autocorrelation, and phase locking value (PLV) to estimate the synchronization between the inertial and fingertip sensors for each condition.
resultsThe PILTE group showed significantly higher walking speed and HR values in the anteroposterior (AP) direction than those of the NT and PILTN groups. Additionally, the PLVs were significantly higher in the mediolateral (ML) direction in the PILTE group than in the PILTN group. In contrast, applying PILTE significantly reduced the PLVs in the AP direction compared with that observed for PILTN.
conclusionsThese findings suggest that the fingertips of skilled contact provider and the shift in the center of gravity of the contact receiver synchronize in the ML direction, which affects walking speed and smooth movement of walking patterns because of increased HR in the AP direction. Additionally, physical responses during walking to PILT administered by contact providers may change depending on the experience of the contact providers. Thus, the quantification of touch skills may potentially aid in administering effective walking assistance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.