University of Illinois Chicago
Browse

Intensity and generalization of treadmill slip training: High or low, progressive increase or decrease?

Download (468.46 kB)
journal contribution
posted on 2017-11-11, 00:00 authored by X Liu, T Bhatt, YC Pai
The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy of different treadmill slip training protocols on the transfer of reactive and proactive control of center of mass stability to a novel, over-ground slip. Four training protocols were investigated: high-intensity (HI; acceleration of all treadmill slips=12m/s(2)), low-intensity (LO; acceleration of all treadmill slips=6m/s(2)), progressively increasing intensity (INCR; acceleration of treadmill slips increasing from 6m/s(2) to 12m/s(2) over the course of training), and progressively decreasing intensity (DECR; acceleration of treadmill slips decreasing from 12m/s(2) to 6m/s(2) over the course of training). From a pool of 36 young subjects, nine were randomly assigned to each training protocol (HI, LO, INCR, and DECR). In each protocol, subjects underwent a series of 24 treadmill slips before they experienced a novel slip during over-ground walking. Measures from these subjects were compared across groups and to data from control subjects (CTRL, n=9) who had experienced a novel over-ground slip without treadmill training as part of a previous experiment. The results showed that treadmill slip training improved balance control on over-ground slip and had a larger effect on subjects׳ reactive control of stability (44.3%) than on proactive control (27.1%) in comparison with the CTRL group. HI yielded stronger generalization than LO, while INCR was only marginally better than DECR. Finally, the group means of stability displayed a clear ascending order from CTRL, LO, DECR, INCR, to HI.

Funding

This work was funded by NIH RO1-AG029616 and NIH RO1-AG044364.

History

Publisher Statement

This is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Journal of Biomechanics. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Journal of Biomechanics, 2016. 49(2): 135-140. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2015.06.004.

Publisher

Elsevier Inc.

issn

0021-9290

Issue date

2016-01-25

Usage metrics

    Categories

    No categories selected

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC