dc.description.abstract | Objective: The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of attentional demands on dynamic postural stability between subject with spinal cord injured and age-matched healthy adults during arm-trunk coordinated movement combined with arithmetic subtraction task.
Method: Twelve age-matched healthy adults (mean age= 37 years) and 12 subjects with complete T7-T12 thoracic cord injury (mean age= 36.3 years) were recruited. They received dual task paradigm test at seated position. The primary task was an arm-trunk coordinated movement by using the body and shoulder to performed repetitive arm circular drawing movement on sitting position. The secondary task was an auditory arithmetic subtraction task by listening two-digit number and answering minus one quickly. In the single, primary task condition, subjects performed 2 sets of arm-trunk coordinated stability task with totally 10 repetitive circles/set. In the single, secondary task condition, subjects performed 2 sets of auditory arithmetic subtraction task, and two-digit number (10~99) appeared randomly in 6 trials per set during quiet sitting. In the dual task condition, subjects performed 2 sets arm-trunk coordinated stability task combined with arithmetic subtraction task randomly. (i.e., totally 20 circles with 12 dual trials). The performance of dynamic postural stability was reflected by kinetics of center of pressure (COP), kinematics of arm-trunk coordinated movement, and neuromuscular electromyographic (EMG) responses. The attentional demand was reflected by verbal reaction time (VRT). A two-way repeated measure ANOVA and Bonferroni adjustment were performed to determine the group effect and task effect for each variable.
Results: In the performance of single, primary arm-trunk coordinated task, the main findings included: (1) the COP maximal M-L displacement, the COP path and COP elliptical area were smaller (p<0.01) in the SCI group than the healthy group, (2) the shoulder adduction/abduction angle of the SCI group was bigger than the healthy group (p<0.001), but trunk flexion/extension angle, pelvic anterior/posterior tilt angle and rotation angle of SCI group were smaller than healthy group (p<0.05), (3) the SCI group increased significantly (p<0.016) their cylinder tip error of x-y-component and total cylinder tip error, compared with the healthy group, (4) the NARMS right erector spinae (RT6PS), right abdominal oblique (ROA) and posterior deltoid (PD) were larger (p<0.025) in SCI group than the healthy group when trunk flexion. The NARMS of left erector spinae (LT6PS), right abdominal oblique (ROA) and pectoralis major (PEC) were larger (p<0.05) in SCI group than the healthy group conditions when trunk extension. In the performance of single, secondary auditory arithmetic subtraction task, it was found that VRT was significantly longer than the healthy group (p<0.001). In the dual task condition, the VRTs of the both groups were significantly longer than single task, and the VRT of the SCI group was longer than the healthy group. In the performance of arm-trunk coordinated dual task, the main findings were as follows. (1) The movement time (MT) of each cycle was significantly longer (p<0.001) in both groups comparison with the single task condition. (2) The COP maximal A-P displacement, the COP path and COP elliptical area increased significantly (p<0.05) in the SCI group compared with a single task performance, but smaller than the healthy groups (p<0.005). (3) Both the groups displayed an arm circular drawing trajectory with a significantly larger total cylinder tip error, cylinder tip error of x-y-dimension and z- dimension (p<0.05) than single task condition. The SCI group increased significantly (p<0.05) their cylinder tip error of x-y-component and total cylinder tip error, compared with the healthy group. (4) The SCI group displayed an arm-trunk movement with a significantly larger shoulder adduction/abduction angle, shoulder flexion/extension angle, trunk flexion/extension, rotation and pelvic anterior/posterior tilt (p<0.001) than single task condition, but the healthy group displayed significantly larger shoulder adduction/abduction and flexion/extension angles (p<0.01) than single task condition. (5) The NARMS of RT6PS, ROA and PD were larger (p<0.025) in SCI group than the healthy group when trunk flexion. The NARMS of RT6PS, LT6PS, ROA and PEC were larger (p<0.05) in SCI group than the healthy group during trunk extension. The NARMS of RT6PS, LT6PS, left abdominal oblique (LOA), PEC, and PD in SCI group (p<0.05) were increased more than single task condition whenever trunk in flexion or extension. In contrast, The NARMS of PEC, and PD were increased more than single task condition whenever trunk in flexion or extension.
Conclusions: The attentional demand for dynamic postural stability during arm-trunk coordinated circular movement in subjects with SCI was more than that in age-matched healthy adults during performing dual task. This study indicated that both groups would exceed the central processing capacity during performing dual task. The attention of healthy subjects focused more in maintaining dynamic sitting stability which made a less efficient performance in secondary task, and also needed longer movement time in performing primary task, so dynamic sitting stability of healthy subjects depended on attentional demand. When SCI subjects performed dual task, not only the performance of secondary task became less efficient, their performance in primary task also became less efficient. Therefore, SCI subjects needed more attentional demand than healthy subjects in maintaining dynamic sitting stability during dual task. This study provided clinical physical therapists in assessment and training with deficits in attention and dynamic sitting stability. In clinical practice, we could assess the attentional demand in maintaining dynamic sitting stability by dual task test, and understood the effect of attention on postural control. | en |
dc.relation.reference | 1. Abernethy B. Dual-task methodology and motor skills research: some applications and methodological constraints. J Hum Mov Stud 1988;14:101-32.
2. Adamovich SV, Archambault PS, Ghafouri M et al. Hand trajectory invariance in reaching movements. Exp Brain Res 2001;138:288–303.
3. Adler CA, Sax KW, Holland S, Schmithorst V, Rosenberg L, Strakowski SM. Changes in Neuronal Activation With Increasing Attention Demand in Healthy Volunteers: An fMRI Study. Synapse 2001;42:266-272.
4. American Spinal Injury Association /International Medical Society of paraplegia. International standards for neurological and functional classification of spinal cord injury patients (revised). Chicago (IL): American Spinal Association;1992.
5. Bernstein NA (1967) The coordination and regulation of movements. Pergamon, Oxford.
6. Broadbent DE. Perception and communication. London: Pergamon, 1958.
7. Brown L, Shumway-Cook A, Woollacott M. Attentional demands and postural recovery: the effects of aging. J Gerontol 1999;54:M165-71.
8. Burke DC, Burley HT, Ungar GH. Data on spinal injuries: Part II. Outcome of the treatment of 352 consecutive admissions. Aust N Z J Surg 1985;55:377-382.
9. Carnahan H, McFadyen BJ. Visuomotor control when reaching toward and grasping moving targets. Acta Psychol 1996;92:17–32.
10. Carr J, Shepherd R. Balance. In: Carr J, Shepherd R, editors. Neurological rehabilitation: Optimizing motor performance. Oxford ; Boston : Butterworth-Heinemann. 1998; p154-81.
11. Chari VR, Kirby RL. Lower-limb influence on sitting balance while reaching forward. Arch Phy Med Rehabil 1986;67:730-33.
12. Cordo PJ, Nashner LM. Properties of postural adjustments associated with rapid arm movements. J Neurophysiol 1982;47:287-302.
13. Coull JT, Frith CD, Buchel C, Nobre AC. Orienting attention in time: behavioural and neuroanatomical distinction between exogenous and endogenous shifts. Neuropsychologia 2000;38:808–819.
14. Cowell SF, Egan GF, Code C, Harasty J, Watson JD. The functional neuroanatomy of simple calculation and number repetition: a parametric PET activation study. Neuroimage 2000;12:565–573.
15. Cram JR, Kasman GS, Holtz J. Introduction to surface electromyography. Gaithersburg, Md.: Aspen Publishers; 1998.
16. Crosbie J, Shepherd RB, Squire T. Postural and voluntary movement during reaching in sitting: the role of the lower limbs. J Human Move Studies 1995;28:103-26.
17. Dean CM, Shepherd RB. Task-related training improves performance of seated reaching tasks following stroke: A randomized controlled trial. Stroke 1997;28:722-28.
18. Desmurget M, Jordan M, Prablanc C, Jeannerod M. Constrained and unconstrained movements involve different control strategies. J Neurophysiol 1997;77:1644–1650.
19. Deutsch JA, Deutsch D. Attention: some theoretical considerations. Psychological Review 1963;70:80-90.
20. Di Fabio RP. Reliability of computerized surface electromyography for determining the onset of muscle activity. Phys Ther 1987;67:43-48.
21. Do MC, Moynot C. Are paraplegics handicapped in the execution of manual task? Ergonomics 1985;28(9):1363-75.
22. Ebersbach G, Dimitrijevic MR, Poewe W. Influence of concurrent tasks on gait: a dual-task approach. Percept Mot Skills1995;81:107-13.
23. Folstein MF, Fp;stein SE, McHugh PR. “mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res. 1975;12:189-198.
24. Gillen G, Burkhardt A. Overview of balance impairments: functional implications. In: Gillen G, Burkhardt A, editors. Stroke rehabilitation: a function-based approach. St. Louis, Mo.: Mosby. 1998;90-108.
25. Hirschfeld H, Forssberg H. Phase-dependent modulations of anticipatory postural activity during human locomotion. J Neurophysiol 1991;66(1):12-19.
26. Hobson DA, Tooms RE. Seated lumbar/pelvic alignment. A comparison between spinal-cord injured and non-injured groups. Spine 1992;17: 293-298.
27. Horak F. Clinical measurement of postural control in adults. Phys Ther. 1987;67(12):1881-5.
28. Jain A. Fundamentals of digital image processing, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1986.
29. Kahneman D. Attention and effort. Engkewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1973.
30. Kaminski TR, Bock C, Gentile AM. The coordination between trunk and arm motion during pointing movements. Exp Brain Res 1995;106:457–466.
31. Keele SW. Attention and human performance. Pacific Palisades, CA: Goodyear, 1973.
32. Kerr B, Condon SM, McDonald LA. Cognitive spatial processing and the regulation of posture. J Exp Psychol 1985;11:617–22.
33. Kirshblum SC, Memmo P, Kim N, Campagnolo D, Millis S. Comparison of the Revised 2000 American Spinal Injury Association Classification Standards with the 1996 Guidelines. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2002;81:502-5.
34. Kirshblum SC, O'Connor KC. Predicting neurologic recovery in traumatic cervical spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1998;79:1456-66.
35. Koshland GF, Galloway JC, Nevoret-Bell J. Control of the wrist in three-joint arm movements to multiple directions in the horizontal plane. J Neurophysiol. 2000;83:3188-3195.
36. Koski L, Paus T, Hofle N, Petrides M. Increased blood flow in the basal ganglia when using cues to direct attention. Exp Brain Res 1999;129:241–246.
37. Ku¨c¸u¨kdeveci AA, Yavuzer G, Tennant A, Su¨ldu¨r N, Sonel B and Arasil T. Adaptation of the modified barthel index for use in physical medicine and rehabilitation in TURKEY. Scand J Rehab Med 2000; 32: 87-92.
38. Kulig K, Craig JN, Mulroy SJ, Rao S, Gronley JK, Bontrager EL, Perry J. The effect of level of spinal cord injury on shoulder joint kinetics during manual wheelchair propulsion. Clin Biomech 2001;16:744–751.
39. Lajoie Y, Barbeau H, Hamelin M. Attentional requirements of walking in spinal cord injured patients compared to normal subjects. Spinal Cord 1999;37(4):245-50.
40. Lajoie Y, Teasdale N, Bard C, Fleury M. Attentional demands for static and dynamic equilibrium. Exp Brain Res 1993;97:139–44.
41. Lajoie Y, Teasdale N, Bard C, Fleury M. Upright standing and gait: are there changes in attentional requirements related to normal aging? Exp Aging Res 1996;22:185–98.
42. Lang CE and Bastian AJ. Cerebellar Damage Impairs Automaticity of a Recently Practiced Movement. J Neurophysiol. 2002;87:1336-47.
43. Ma S, Feldman AG. Two functionally different synergies during arm reaching movements involving the trunk. J Neurophysiol 1995;73:2120–2122.
44. Marciello MA, Herbison GJ, Cohen ME, Schmidt R. Elbow extension using anterior deltoids and upper pectorals in spinal cord-injured subjects. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1995;76:426–432
45. Marieb EN. The central nervous system. In: Marieb EN, editor. Human anatomy and physiology. 2nd. Redwood City, Calif.: Benjamin/Cummings. 1992;p378-422.
46. Maylor EA., Allison S, Wing AM. Effects of spatial and nonspatial cognitive activity on postural stability. British J Psych 2001; 92, 319–338.
47. Maylor EA, Wing AM. Age differences in postural stability are increased by additional cognitive demands. J Gerontol 1996;51B:P143–54.
48. McIlroy WE, Norrie RG, Brooke JD, Bishop DC, Nelson AJ, Maki BE. Temporal properties of attention sharing consequent to disturbed balance. NeuroReport 1999;10:2895–9.
49. Nelson A, Ahmed S, Harrow J, Fitzgerald S, Sanchez-Anguiano A, Gavin-Dreschnack D. Fall-related fractures in persons with spinal cord impairment: a descriptive analysis. SCI Nurs 2003;20(1):30-7.
50. Neumann O. Theories of attention. In: Neumann O, Sanders AF (eds). Handbook of perception and action, Vol. 3: Attention. San Diego: Academic Press, 1996:389-446.
51. Parasuraman R. Effects of information processing demands on slow negative shift latencies and N100 amplitude in selective and divided attention. Biol Psychol. 1980;11:217-33.
52. Pellecchia GL. Postural sway increases with attentional demands of concurrent cognitive task. Gait and Posture 2003b;18,29-34.
53. Pigeon P, Feldman AG. Compensatory arm–trunk coordination in pointing movements is preserved in the absence of visual feedback. Brain Res 1998;802:274–280.
54. Posner M, Keele S. Attention demands of movements. Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of Applied Psychology, Amsterdam, 1969.
55. Potten YJM, Seelen HAM, Drukker J et al, Postural muscle responses in the spinal cord injured persons during forward reaching. Ergonomics 1999;42(9):1200-15.
56. Reft J, Hasan Z. Trajectories of target reaching arm movements in individual with spinal cord injury: effect of external support. Spinal Cord 2002;40:186–191.
57. Rossi E, Mitnitski A, Feldman AG. Sequential control signals determine arm and trunk contributions to hand transport during reaching in humans. J Physiol (Lond) 2002;538(2):659–671.
58. Rypma B, Prabhakaran V, Desmond JE, Glover GH, Gabrieli JDE. Load-dependent roles of frontal brain regions in the maintenance of working memory. NeuroImage 1999:216–226.
59. Saling M, Stelmach GE, Mescheriakov S, Berger M. Prehension with trunk assisted reaching. Behav Brain Res 1996;80:153–160.
60. Salmoni AW, Sullivan JJ, Starkes JL. The attentional demands of movement: a critique of the probe technique. J Motor Behav 1976;8:161-69.
61. Schmidt RA, Lee TD. Attention and performance. In: Schmidt RA, Lee TD, editors. Motor Control and Learning: A behavioral emphasis. 4th ed. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2005;p89-112.
62. Seelen HAM and Vuurman EFPM. Compensatory muscle activity for sitting posture during upper extremity task performance in paraplegic subjects. Scand J Rehab Med 1991;(23):89-96.
63. Seelen HAM, Potten YJM, Drukker J, Reulen JPH and Pons C. Development of new muscle synergies in postural control in spinal cord injured subjects, Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology 1998;(8):23-34.
64. Seelen HAM, Potten YJM, Huson A, Spaans F and Reulen JPH. Impaired balance control in paraplegic subjects. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology 1997;(7):149-160.
65. Shaffer LH. Attention in transcription skill. J Exp Psych 1971;23:107-22.
66. Shah S, Vanclay F, Cooper B. Improving the sensitivity of the Barthel Index for stroke rehabilitation. J Clin Epidemiol 1989; 42:703-709.
67. Shumway-Cook A, Woollacott M. Normal postural control. In Shumway-Cook A, Woollacott M, editors. Motor Control: Theory and Practical Applications, 2nd ed. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott, Williams and Wilkens; 2000; p163-191.
68. Shumway-Cook A, Woollacott M. Attentional demands and postural control: the effect of sensory context. J Gerontol 2000;55A:M10–6.
69. Teasdale N, Bard C, LaRue J, Fleury M: On the cognitive penetrability of posture control. Exp Aging Res 1993;19:1–13.
70. Tyler AE, Hasan Z. Qualitative discrepancies between trunk muscle activity and dynamic postural requirements at the initiation of reaching movements performed while sitting. Exp Brain Res 1995; 107: 87-95.
71. Vuillerme N, Isableu B, Nougier V. Attentional demands associated with the use of a light fingertip touch for postural control during quiet standing. Exp Brain Res 2006;169(2):232-6.
72. Welford AT. The ‘psychological refractory period’ and the timing of high-speed performance- a review and a theory. British J psych 1952;43:2-19.
73. Winter D. Biomechanics and motor control of human movement, New York: Wiley, 1990.
74. Woodruff PWR, Benson RR, Bandettini PA, Kwong KK, Howard RJ, Talavage T, Belliveau J, Rosen BR. Modulation of auditory and visual cortex by selective attention is modality-dependent. Neuroreport 1996;7:1909–1913.
75. Woollacott M, Shumway-Cook A. Attention and the control of posture and gait: a review of an emerging area of research. Gait and Posture 2002;16:1-14.
76. Wright DL, Kemp TL. The dual-task methodology and assessing the attentional demands of ambulation with walking devices. Phys Ther 1992;72:306-15.
77. Yardley L, Gardner M, Leadbetter A, Lavie N. Effect of articulatory and mental tasks on postural control. Neuro Report 1999;10(2):215–9. | en |