Advertisement

Effect of a cognitive task on online adjustments when avoiding stepping on an obstacle and stepping on a target during walking in young adults

  • Andréia Abud da Silva Costa
  • Luciana Oliveira dos Santos
  • Renato Moraes
Research Article

Abstract

During locomotion, we respond to environmental and task changes by adjusting steps length and width. Different protocols involving stepping on targets and obstacle avoidance suggest the involvement of cortical and subcortical pathways in these online adjustments. The addition of a concomitant cognitive task (CT) can affect these online corrections depending on the neural pathway used. Thereby, we investigated the online adjustment using a target stepping task and a planar obstacle avoidance task in young adults and analyzed the effect of a CT on these adjustments. Twenty young adults executed two blocks of trials of walking performing the target task (TT) and obstacle avoidance task (OAT), with and without a concomitant CT. In the TT, participants stepped on a target projected on the ground, whereas in the OAT they avoided stepping on an obstacle projected on the ground. The target/obstacle could change its original position in four directions at contralateral foot contact on the ground. Overall, the CT did not affect the latency to start the adjustments due to target/obstacle change. The main changes were restricted to the frontal plane adjustments. The latency for the medial and lateral choices in the OAT was ~ 200 ms, whereas for the TT was ~ 150 ms. These results suggest the involvement of a slow cortical pathway in the OAT in the frontal plane modifications. In turn, the TT may be controlled by one of two fast adjustment neural pathways.

Keywords

Adaptive locomotion Latency Target Obstacle Digit-monitoring task 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP/Brazil—Grant 2016/02202-8) supported this study. We would like to thank Eduardo Bergonzoni Junqueira and Tenysson Will de Lemos for their technical assistance.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Beloozerova I, Farrell BJ, Sirota MG, Prilutsky BI (2010) Differences in movement mechanics, electromyographic, and motor cortex activity between accurate and nonaccurate stepping. J Neurophysiol 103:2285–2300.  https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00360.2009 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. Bloem BR, Valkenburg VV, Slabbekoorn M, Willemsen MD (2001) The multiple tasks test: development and normal strategies. Gait Posture 14:191–202.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jns.2006.05.010 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Elias LJ, Bryden MP, Bulman-Fleming MB (1998) Footedness is a better predictor than is handedness of emotional lateralization. Neuropsychologia 36:37–43.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0028-3932(97)00107-3 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Hausdorff JM, Schweiger A, Herman T, Yogev-Seligmann G, Giladi N (2008) Dual-task decrements in gait: contributing factors among healthy older adults. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 63:1335–1343.  https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/63.12.1335 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Hofstad CJ, Weerdesteyn V, van der Linde H, Nienhuis B, Geurts AC, Duysens J (2009) Evidence for bilaterally delayed and decreased obstacle avoidance responses while walking with a lower limb prosthesis. Clin Neurophysiol 120:1009–1015.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2009.03.003 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Hoogkamer W, Potocanac Z, Duysens J (2015) Quick foot placement adjustments during gait: direction matters. Exp Brain Res 233:3349–3357.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-015-4401-y CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Huxhold O, Li SC, Schmiedek F, Lindenberger U (2006) Dual-tasking postural control: aging and the effects of cognitive demand in conjunction with focus of attention. Brain Res Bull 69:294–305.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainresbull.2006.01.002 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Kelly V, Janke A, Shumway-Cook A (2013) Factors Influencing dynamic prioritization during dual task walking n healthy young adults. Gait Posture 37:131–134.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2012.05.031 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Kim HD, Brunt D (2009) The effect of a sensory perturbation on step direction or length while crossing an obstacle from quiet stance. Gait Posture 30:1–4.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2009.02.016 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Marigold D, Patla A (2008) Age-related changes in gait for multi-surface terrain. Gait Posture 27:689–696.  https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00691.2001 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Mazaheri M, Hoogkamer W, Potocanac Z, Verschueren S, Roerdink M, Beek PJ, Peper CE, Duysens J (2015) Effects of aging and dual tasking on step adjustments to perturbations in visually cued walking. Exp Brain Res 233:3467–3474.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-015-4407-5 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Moraes R (2014) A model for selecting alternate foot placement during human locomotion. Psychol Neurosci 7:319–329.  https://doi.org/10.3922/j.psns.2014.038 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Moraes R, Gobbi LTB (2008) Controle visual da locomoção adaptativa e da mobilidade em indivíduos idosos [Visual control of adaptive locomotion and mobility in older adults]. In: Corrêa UC (ed) Pesquisa em comportamento motor: a intervenção profissional em perspectiva. EFP/EEFEUSP, São Paulo, pp 42–60Google Scholar
  14. Moraes R, Patla AE (2006) Determinants guiding alternate foot placement selection and the behavioral responses are similar when avoiding a real or a virtual obstacle. Exp Brain Res 171:497–510.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-005-0297-2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Moraes R, Lewis MA, Patla AE (2004) Strategies and determinants for selection of alternate foot placement during human locomotion: influence of spatial and temporal constraints. Exp Brain Res 159:1–13.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-004-1888-z PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Moraes R, Allard F, Patla AE (2007) Validating determinants for an alternate foot placement selection algorithm during human locomotion in cluttered terrain. J Neurophysiol 98:1928–1940.  https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00044.2006 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. O’Connor SM, Kuo AD (2009) Direction-dependent control of balance during walking and standing. J Neurophysiol 102:1411–1419.  https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00131.2009 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Patla AE (2003) Strategies for dynamic stability during human locomotion. IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag 22:48–52.  https://doi.org/10.1109/MEMB.2003.1195695 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Patla AE, Prentice SD, Rietdyk S, Allard F, Martin C (1999) What guides the selection of alternate foot placement during locomotion in humans. Exp Brain Res 128:441–450.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s002210050867 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Pieruccini-Faria F, Ehgoetz Martens KA, Silveira CR, Jones JA, Almeida QJ (2014) Interactions between cognitive and sensory load while planning and controlling complex gait adaptations in Parkinson’s disease. BMC Neurol 14:250.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-014-0250-8 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Plummer P, Apple S, Dowd C, Keith E (2015) Texting and walking: effect of environmental setting and task prioritization on dual-task interference in healthy young adults. Gait Posture 41:46–51.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2014.08.007 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Potocanac Z, Duysens J (2017) Online adjustments of leg movements in healthy young and old. Exp Brain Res 235:2329–2348.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-017-4967-7 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Reynolds RF, Day BL (2005) Rapid visuo-motor processes drive the leg regardless of balance constraints. Curr Biol 15:48–49.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2004.12.051 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rosano C, Brach J, Longstreth WT Jr, Newman AB (2005) Quantitative measures of gait characteristics indicate prevalence of underlying subclinical structural brain abnormalities in high-functioning older adults. Neuroepidemiology 26:52–60.  https://doi.org/10.1159/000089240 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Springer S, Giladi N, Peretz C, Yogev G, Simon ES, Hausdorff JM (2006) Dual-tasking effects on gait variability: the role of aging, falls, and executive function. Mov Disord 21:950–957.  https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.20848 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Tseng SC, Stanhope SJ, Morton SM (2009) Impaired reactive stepping adjustments in older adults. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 64:807–815.  https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/glp027 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Weerdesteyn V, Nienhuis B, Hampsink B, Duysens J (2004) Gait adjustments in response to an obstacle are faster than voluntary reactions. Hum Mov Sci 23:351–363.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2004.08.011 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Weerdesteyn V, Nienhuis B, Mulder T, Duysens J (2005) Older women strongly prefer stride lengthening to shortening in avoiding obstacles. Exp Brain Res 161:39–46.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-004-2043-6 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Weerdesteyn V, Nienhuis B, Geurts AC, Duysens J (2007) Age-related deficits in early response characteristics of obstacle avoidance under time pressure. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 62:1041–1047.  https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/62.9.1042 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Winter DA (2005) Biomechanics and motor control of human movement. Wiley, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  31. Yogev-Seligmann G, Rotem-Galili Y, Mirelman A, Dickstein R, Giladi N, Hausdorff JM (2010) How does explicit prioritization alter walking during dual-task performance? Effects of age and sex on gait speed and variability. Phys Ther 90:177–186.  https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20090043 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. Young WR, Hollands MA (2012) Evidence for age-related decline in visuomotor function and reactive stepping adjustments. Gait Posture 36:477–481.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2012.04.009 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ribeirão Preto Medical School, Graduate Program in Rehabilitation and Functional PerformanceUniversity of São PauloRibeirão PretoBrazil
  2. 2.Biomechanics and Motor Control Laboratory, School of Physical Education and Sport of Ribeirão PretoUniversity of São PauloRibeirão PretoBrazil

Personalised recommendations