Cargando…
Impact of Visual Biofeedback of Trunk Sway Smoothness on Motor Learning during Unipedal Stance
The assessment of trunk sway smoothness using an accelerometer sensor embedded in a smartphone could be a biomarker for tracking motor learning. This study aimed to determine the reliability of trunk sway smoothness and the effect of visual biofeedback of sway smoothness on motor learning in healthy...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7248825/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32370050 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s20092585 |
_version_ | 1783538460496232448 |
---|---|
author | Cruz-Montecinos, Carlos Cuesta-Vargas, Antonio Muñoz, Cristian Flores, Dante Ellsworth, Joseph De la Fuente, Carlos Calatayud, Joaquín Rivera-Lillo, Gonzalo Soto-Arellano, Verónica Tapia, Claudio García-Massó, Xavier |
author_facet | Cruz-Montecinos, Carlos Cuesta-Vargas, Antonio Muñoz, Cristian Flores, Dante Ellsworth, Joseph De la Fuente, Carlos Calatayud, Joaquín Rivera-Lillo, Gonzalo Soto-Arellano, Verónica Tapia, Claudio García-Massó, Xavier |
author_sort | Cruz-Montecinos, Carlos |
collection | PubMed |
description | The assessment of trunk sway smoothness using an accelerometer sensor embedded in a smartphone could be a biomarker for tracking motor learning. This study aimed to determine the reliability of trunk sway smoothness and the effect of visual biofeedback of sway smoothness on motor learning in healthy people during unipedal stance training using an iPhone 5 measurement system. In the first experiment, trunk sway smoothness in the reliability group (n = 11) was assessed on two days, separated by one week. In the second, the biofeedback group (n = 12) and no-biofeedback group (n = 12) were compared during 7 days of unipedal stance test training and one more day of retention (without biofeedback). The intraclass correlation coefficient score 0.98 (0.93–0.99) showed that this method has excellent test–retest reliability. Based on the power law of practice, the biofeedback group showed greater improvement during training days (p = 0.003). Two-way mixed analysis of variance indicates a significant difference between groups (p < 0.001) and between days (p < 0.001), as well as significant interaction (p < 0.001). Post hoc analysis shows better performance in the biofeedback group from training days 2 and 7, as well as on the retention day (p < 0.001). Motor learning objectification through visual biofeedback of trunk sway smoothness enhances postural control learning and is useful and reliable for assessing motor learning. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7248825 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-72488252020-06-10 Impact of Visual Biofeedback of Trunk Sway Smoothness on Motor Learning during Unipedal Stance Cruz-Montecinos, Carlos Cuesta-Vargas, Antonio Muñoz, Cristian Flores, Dante Ellsworth, Joseph De la Fuente, Carlos Calatayud, Joaquín Rivera-Lillo, Gonzalo Soto-Arellano, Verónica Tapia, Claudio García-Massó, Xavier Sensors (Basel) Article The assessment of trunk sway smoothness using an accelerometer sensor embedded in a smartphone could be a biomarker for tracking motor learning. This study aimed to determine the reliability of trunk sway smoothness and the effect of visual biofeedback of sway smoothness on motor learning in healthy people during unipedal stance training using an iPhone 5 measurement system. In the first experiment, trunk sway smoothness in the reliability group (n = 11) was assessed on two days, separated by one week. In the second, the biofeedback group (n = 12) and no-biofeedback group (n = 12) were compared during 7 days of unipedal stance test training and one more day of retention (without biofeedback). The intraclass correlation coefficient score 0.98 (0.93–0.99) showed that this method has excellent test–retest reliability. Based on the power law of practice, the biofeedback group showed greater improvement during training days (p = 0.003). Two-way mixed analysis of variance indicates a significant difference between groups (p < 0.001) and between days (p < 0.001), as well as significant interaction (p < 0.001). Post hoc analysis shows better performance in the biofeedback group from training days 2 and 7, as well as on the retention day (p < 0.001). Motor learning objectification through visual biofeedback of trunk sway smoothness enhances postural control learning and is useful and reliable for assessing motor learning. MDPI 2020-05-01 /pmc/articles/PMC7248825/ /pubmed/32370050 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s20092585 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Cruz-Montecinos, Carlos Cuesta-Vargas, Antonio Muñoz, Cristian Flores, Dante Ellsworth, Joseph De la Fuente, Carlos Calatayud, Joaquín Rivera-Lillo, Gonzalo Soto-Arellano, Verónica Tapia, Claudio García-Massó, Xavier Impact of Visual Biofeedback of Trunk Sway Smoothness on Motor Learning during Unipedal Stance |
title | Impact of Visual Biofeedback of Trunk Sway Smoothness on Motor Learning during Unipedal Stance |
title_full | Impact of Visual Biofeedback of Trunk Sway Smoothness on Motor Learning during Unipedal Stance |
title_fullStr | Impact of Visual Biofeedback of Trunk Sway Smoothness on Motor Learning during Unipedal Stance |
title_full_unstemmed | Impact of Visual Biofeedback of Trunk Sway Smoothness on Motor Learning during Unipedal Stance |
title_short | Impact of Visual Biofeedback of Trunk Sway Smoothness on Motor Learning during Unipedal Stance |
title_sort | impact of visual biofeedback of trunk sway smoothness on motor learning during unipedal stance |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7248825/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32370050 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s20092585 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT cruzmontecinoscarlos impactofvisualbiofeedbackoftrunkswaysmoothnessonmotorlearningduringunipedalstance AT cuestavargasantonio impactofvisualbiofeedbackoftrunkswaysmoothnessonmotorlearningduringunipedalstance AT munozcristian impactofvisualbiofeedbackoftrunkswaysmoothnessonmotorlearningduringunipedalstance AT floresdante impactofvisualbiofeedbackoftrunkswaysmoothnessonmotorlearningduringunipedalstance AT ellsworthjoseph impactofvisualbiofeedbackoftrunkswaysmoothnessonmotorlearningduringunipedalstance AT delafuentecarlos impactofvisualbiofeedbackoftrunkswaysmoothnessonmotorlearningduringunipedalstance AT calatayudjoaquin impactofvisualbiofeedbackoftrunkswaysmoothnessonmotorlearningduringunipedalstance AT riveralillogonzalo impactofvisualbiofeedbackoftrunkswaysmoothnessonmotorlearningduringunipedalstance AT sotoarellanoveronica impactofvisualbiofeedbackoftrunkswaysmoothnessonmotorlearningduringunipedalstance AT tapiaclaudio impactofvisualbiofeedbackoftrunkswaysmoothnessonmotorlearningduringunipedalstance AT garciamassoxavier impactofvisualbiofeedbackoftrunkswaysmoothnessonmotorlearningduringunipedalstance |