Ghent University Academic Bibliography

Advanced

Are postural adjustments in catching equilibrium control or movement support?

Pieter Tijtgat UGent, Jos Vanrenterghem, Simon Bennett, Dirk De Clercq UGent, Geert Savelsbergh and Matthieu Lenoir UGent (2012) ISPGR/Gait & Mental Function 1st joint world congress : symposia, oral and poster sessions : authors, titles, affiliations and abstracts. p.277-278
abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM: The purpose of this study was to investigate postural adjustments that are made in response to raising the arm in one-handed ball catching, given that postural balance might be decisive for successful catching performance [1]. Specifically, it was examined if postural adjustments are a response to overcome the disturbance of balance or merely a consequence of the movement at hand. METHODS: Full body kinematics, kinetics and postural muscle activity while raising the arm when catching a fast-moving ball were compared to a well-studied reaction-time arm raising task. RESULTS: The focal movement of arm raising showed more elbow flexion in catching compared to the reaction-time task (Wilcoxon test, p<0.05). Consequently, smaller inertial forces for catching resulted in different postural control mechanisms. In catching, postural adjustments were initiated by co-activation of postural muscles for initial segment stabilization (Fig. 1, left panel), followed by an inverted pendulum mechanism for equilibrium control. Raising the arm in the reaction-time task resulted in early reciprocal muscle activity (Fig. 1, right panel) and segmental counter-rotating at hip-level in addition to the inverted pendulum mechanism to maintain balance. CONCLUSIONS: During arm raising for a reaction-time task or for unconstrained catching, anticipatory postural adjustments seem to be a consequence of the inertia of the movement itself (movement support), rather than a mechanism to overcome possible future disequilibrium [2,3]. Afterwards, compensatory postural mechanisms involving inverted pendulum control with additional segmental counter-rotation to maintain balance are suggested for raising the arm in a reaction-time task, while mainly an inverted pendulum mechanism accommodates equilibrium control when raising the arm for catching [4]. REFERENCES 1. Davids et al. Res Q Exerc Sport. 71: 69-73, 2000 2. Pozzo et al. Biol Cybern. 85: 39-49, 2001 3. Patla et al. Exp Brain Res. 143: 318-327, 2002 4. Hof. J Biomech. 40: 451-457, 2007
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
year
type
conference
publication status
published
subject
in
ISPGR/Gait & Mental Function 1st joint world congress : symposia, oral and poster sessions : authors, titles, affiliations and abstracts
pages
277 - 278
conference name
20th World Congress of the International Society for Posture and Gait Research (ISPGR) ; 1st Joint world congress of ISPGR and Gait & Mental Function
conference location
Trondheim, Norway
conference start
2012-06-24
conference end
2012-06-28
language
English
UGent publication?
yes
classification
C3
copyright statement
I have transferred the copyright for this publication to the publisher
id
2957401
handle
http://hdl.handle.net/1854/LU-2957401
alternative location
http://ispgr.org/fileadmin/templates/_img/norway2012/ISPGR_full_abstract_listing_SOP_2012_06_22_web.pdf
date created
2012-07-06 14:28:47
date last changed
2012-08-02 13:19:33
@inproceedings{2957401,
  abstract     = {BACKGROUND AND AIM: The purpose of this study was to investigate postural adjustments that are made in response to raising the arm in one-handed ball catching, given that postural balance might be decisive for successful catching performance [1]. Specifically, it was examined if postural adjustments are a response to overcome the disturbance of balance or merely a consequence of the movement at hand.
METHODS: Full body kinematics, kinetics and postural muscle activity while raising the arm when catching a fast-moving ball were compared to a well-studied reaction-time arm raising task.
RESULTS: The focal movement of arm raising showed more elbow flexion in catching compared to the reaction-time task (Wilcoxon test, p{\textlangle}0.05). Consequently, smaller inertial forces for catching resulted in different postural control mechanisms. In catching, postural adjustments were initiated by co-activation of postural muscles for initial segment stabilization (Fig. 1, left panel), followed by an inverted pendulum mechanism for equilibrium control. Raising the arm in the reaction-time task resulted in early reciprocal muscle activity (Fig. 1, right panel) and segmental counter-rotating at hip-level in addition to the inverted pendulum mechanism to maintain balance.
CONCLUSIONS: During arm raising for a reaction-time task or for unconstrained catching, anticipatory postural adjustments seem to be a consequence of the inertia of the movement itself (movement support), rather than a mechanism to overcome possible future disequilibrium [2,3]. Afterwards, compensatory postural mechanisms involving inverted pendulum control with additional segmental counter-rotation to maintain balance are suggested for raising the arm in a reaction-time task, while mainly an inverted pendulum mechanism accommodates equilibrium control when raising the arm for catching [4].
REFERENCES 
1.\unmatched{0009}Davids et al. Res Q Exerc Sport. 71: 69-73, 2000
2.\unmatched{0009}Pozzo et al. Biol Cybern. 85: 39-49, 2001
3.\unmatched{0009}Patla et al. Exp Brain Res. 143: 318-327, 2002
4.\unmatched{0009}Hof. J Biomech. 40: 451-457, 2007},
  author       = {Tijtgat, Pieter and Vanrenterghem, Jos and Bennett, Simon and De Clercq, Dirk and Savelsbergh, Geert and Lenoir, Matthieu},
  booktitle    = {ISPGR/Gait \& Mental Function 1st joint world congress : symposia, oral and poster sessions : authors, titles, affiliations and abstracts},
  language     = {eng},
  location     = {Trondheim, Norway},
  pages        = {277--278},
  title        = {Are postural adjustments in catching equilibrium control or movement support?},
  url          = {http://ispgr.org/fileadmin/templates/\_img/norway2012/ISPGR\_full\_abstract\_listing\_SOP\_2012\_06\_22\_web.pdf},
  year         = {2012},
}

Chicago
Tijtgat, Pieter, Jos Vanrenterghem, Simon Bennett, Dirk De Clercq, Geert Savelsbergh, and Matthieu Lenoir. 2012. “Are Postural Adjustments in Catching Equilibrium Control or Movement Support?” In ISPGR/Gait & Mental Function 1st Joint World Congress : Symposia, Oral and Poster Sessions : Authors, Titles, Affiliations and Abstracts, 277–278.
APA
Tijtgat, P., Vanrenterghem, J., Bennett, S., De Clercq, D., Savelsbergh, G., & Lenoir, M. (2012). Are postural adjustments in catching equilibrium control or movement support? ISPGR/Gait & Mental Function 1st joint world congress : symposia, oral and poster sessions : authors, titles, affiliations and abstracts (pp. 277–278). Presented at the 20th World Congress of the International Society for Posture and Gait Research (ISPGR) ; 1st Joint world congress of ISPGR and Gait & Mental Function.
Vancouver
1.
Tijtgat P, Vanrenterghem J, Bennett S, De Clercq D, Savelsbergh G, Lenoir M. Are postural adjustments in catching equilibrium control or movement support? ISPGR/Gait & Mental Function 1st joint world congress : symposia, oral and poster sessions : authors, titles, affiliations and abstracts. 2012. p. 277–8.
MLA
Tijtgat, Pieter, Jos Vanrenterghem, Simon Bennett, et al. “Are Postural Adjustments in Catching Equilibrium Control or Movement Support?” ISPGR/Gait & Mental Function 1st Joint World Congress : Symposia, Oral and Poster Sessions : Authors, Titles, Affiliations and Abstracts. 2012. 277–278. Print.