If Proprioception Is Relevant to Locomotion, then Why Test It Standing Still?

Mervyn Travers, James Debenham, William Gibson, Amity Campbell, Garry Allison

Abstract

Traditionally, proprioception research has utilised passive position or movement detection and repositioning tasks. Current evidence suggests proprioception represents a complex synergy of sensory inputs that may be more appropriately assessed during more functional tasks. This study investigated the Minimal Perceptible Difference (MPD) test - a novel assessment of participants’ ability to perceive floor height changes whilst hopping. Sixteen healthy volunteers performed multiple hopping trials on a custom-built sleigh apparatus that permitted a floor height change (range 3mm to 48mm). The MPD in floor height was recorded for 8 different hopping conditions (Factors - Technique: alternate / bilateral hopping; Side: dominant / non dominant; Direction of change: up / down) over two separate testing occasions. Within and between-day reliability were assessed using ICC and 95% confidence intervals. Hopping technique was the only factor which significantly influenced participants’sensitivity to detect changes in floor height. The mean MPD was significantly lower (p<.0001) for bilateral hopping (15.65mm) when compared to alternate hopping (26.59mm). Bilateral hopping yielded strong ICC for within and between day reliability. We propose the bilateral hopping MPD assessment is a reliable, functional assessment of proprioception sensitivity that may better reflect human gait than established static assessments.

References

  1. Brumagne, S., Cordo, P. J. & Verschueren, S. M. P. 2004. Proprioceptive Weighting Changes In Persons With Low Back Pain And Elderly Persons During Upright Standing. Neuroscience Letters, 366, 63-66.
  2. Cameron, M., Adams, R. & Maher, C. 2008. The Effect Of Neoprene Shorts On Leg Proprioception In Australian Football Players. J Sci Med Sport, 11, 345- 52.
  3. Chinn, S. 1991. Repeatability And Method Comparison. Thorax, 46, 454 - 6.
  4. Down, S., Waddington, G., Adams, R. & Thomson, M. 2007. Movement Discrimination After Intra-Articular Local Anaesthetic Of The Ankle Joint. Br. J. Sports Med., 41, 501 - 505.
  5. Fu, S. & Hui-Chan, C. 2007. Are There Any Relationships Among Ankle Proprioception Acuity, Pre-Landing Ankle Muscle Responses, And Landing Impact In Man? Neuroscience Letters, 417, 123-127.
  6. Herrington, L., Horsley, I., Whitaker, L. & Rolf, C. 2008. Does A Tackling Task Effect Shoulder Joint Position Sense In Rugby Players? Physical Therapy In Sport, 9, 67-71.
  7. Ivanenko, Y., Dominici, N., Daprati, E., Nico, D., Cappellini, G. & Lacquaniti, F. 2011. Locomotor Body Scheme. Human Movement Science, 30, 341- 351.
  8. Ivanenko, Y. P., Grasso, R. & Lacquaniti, F. 2000. Influence Of Leg Muscle Vibration On Human Walking. Journal Of Neurophysiology, 84, 1737-1747.
  9. Jong, A., Kilbreath, S., Refshauge, K. & Adams, R. 2005. Performance In Different Proprioceptive Tests Does Not Correlate In Ankles With Recurrent Sprain. Archives Of Physical Medicine And Rehabilitation, 86, 2101-2105.
  10. Lephart, S. M. & Jari, R. 2002. The Role Of Proprioception Inshoulder Instability. Operative Techniques In Sports Medicine, 10, 2-4.
  11. Longo, M., Azañón, E. & Haggard, P. 2010. More Than Skin Deep: Body Representation Beyond Primary Somatosensory Cortex. Neuropsychologia, 48, 655- 668.
  12. Lowrey, C., Strzalkowski, N. & Bent, L. 2010. Skin Sensory Information From The Dorsum Of The Foot And Ankle Is Necessary For Kinesthesia At The Ankle Joint. Neuroscience Letters, 6 -10
  13. Matre, D., Arendt-Neilsen, L. & Knardahl, S. 2002. Effects Of Localization And Intensity Of Experimental Muscle Pain On Ankle Joint Proprioception. European Journal Of Pain, 6, 245-260.
  14. Proske, U., Wise, A. & Gregory, J. 2000. The Role Of Muscle Receptors In The Detection Of Movements. Progress In Neurobiology, 60, 85-96.
  15. Ribeiro, F., Mota, J. & Oliveira, J. 2007. Effect Of Exercise-Induced Fatigue On Position Sense Of The Knee In The Elderly. Eur J Appl Physiol, 99, 379-85.
  16. Salles, J., Alves, H., Costa, F., Cunha-Cruz, V., Cagy, M., Piedade, R. & Ribeiro, P. 2011. Electrophysiological Analysis Of The Perception Of Passive Movement. Neuroscience Letters, 501, 61-66.
  17. Sherrington, C. 1906. The Integrative Action Of The Nervous System, Yale University Press.
  18. Vuillerme, N. & Boisgontier, M. 2008. Muscle Fatigue Degrades Force Sense At The Ankle Joint. Gait & Posture, 28, 521-524.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Travers M., Debenham J., Gibson W., Campbell A. and Allison G. (2013). If Proprioception Is Relevant to Locomotion, then Why Test It Standing Still? . In - icSPORTS, ISBN , pages 0-0


in Bibtex Style

@conference{icsports13,
author={Mervyn Travers and James Debenham and William Gibson and Amity Campbell and Garry Allison},
title={If Proprioception Is Relevant to Locomotion, then Why Test It Standing Still?},
booktitle={ - icSPORTS,},
year={2013},
pages={},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={},
isbn={},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - - icSPORTS,
TI - If Proprioception Is Relevant to Locomotion, then Why Test It Standing Still?
SN -
AU - Travers M.
AU - Debenham J.
AU - Gibson W.
AU - Campbell A.
AU - Allison G.
PY - 2013
SP - 0
EP - 0
DO -