↓ Skip to main content

Young, Healthy Subjects Can Reduce the Activity of Calf Muscles When Provided with EMG Biofeedback in Upright Stance

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Young, Healthy Subjects Can Reduce the Activity of Calf Muscles When Provided with EMG Biofeedback in Upright Stance
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, April 2016
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2016.00158
Pubmed ID
Authors

Taian M. Vieira, Stéphane Baudry, Alberto Botter

Abstract

Recent evidence suggests the minimization of muscular effort rather than of the size of bodily sway may be the primary, nervous system goal when regulating the human, standing posture. Different programs have been proposed for balance training; none however has been focused on the activation of postural muscles during standing. In this study we investigated the possibility of minimizing the activation of the calf muscles during standing through biofeedback. By providing subjects with an audio signal that varied in amplitude and frequency with the amplitude of surface electromyograms (EMG) recorded from different regions of the gastrocnemius and soleus muscles, we expected them to be able to minimize the level of muscle activation during standing without increasing the excursion of the center of pressure (CoP). CoP data and surface EMG from gastrocnemii, soleus and tibialis anterior muscles were obtained from 10 healthy participants while standing at ease and while standing with EMG biofeedback. Four sensitivities were used to test subjects' responsiveness to the EMG biofeedback. Compared with standing at ease, the two most sensitive feedback conditions induced a decrease in plantar flexor activity (~15%; P < 0.05) and an increase in tibialis anterior EMG (~10%; P < 0.05). Furthermore, CoP mean position significantly shifted backward (~30 mm). In contrast, the use of less sensitive EMG biofeedback resulted in a significant decrease in EMG activity of ankle plantar flexors with a marginal increase in TA activity compared with standing at ease. These changes were not accompanied by greater CoP displacements or significant changes in mean CoP position. Key results revealed subjects were able to keep standing stability while reducing the activity of gastrocnemius and soleus without loading their tibialis anterior muscle when standing with EMG biofeedback. These results may therefore posit the basis for the development of training protocols aimed at assisting subjects in more efficiently controlling leg muscle activity during standing.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Poland 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 58 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 17%
Researcher 8 13%
Student > Master 6 10%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 9 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 12 20%
Engineering 11 18%
Neuroscience 5 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 18 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 April 2016.
All research outputs
#20,323,943
of 22,867,327 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#9,411
of 13,656 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,361
of 299,065 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#91
of 131 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,867,327 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,656 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 299,065 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 131 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.