Advertisement

Study on stumble risk assessment from the motion data of the elderly

  • Emiko UchiyamaEmail author
  • Toshihiro Mino
  • Tomoki Tanaka
  • Yosuke Ikegami
  • Wataru Takano
  • Yoshihiko Nakamura
  • Katsuya Iijima
Conference paper
Part of the Mechanisms and Machine Science book series (Mechan. Machine Science, volume 73)

Abstract

Falls is one of the serious problems in the hyper-aged society. The relationship between fall risk and depth perception has been pointed out, however, not so many motion analysis from this point of view has conducted. In this paper, we focus on stumbles. To clarify how depth perception related with stumbles, we set a hypothesis that people who have a higher risk to stumble show a different specificity of motion when they approach an object on their pathway due to the alteration of their depth perception and/or their motion planning abilities. We set a motion of approaching a ball as the higher risk motion for stumbles and analyzed it. Five young participants and 14 elderly participants were measured. It is found that 12 elderly people put their support legs in further distance from the ball compared with young participants. Five out of these 12 participants the toe off position of their swing legs were also further than young participants. We analyzed these five participants more precisely and found that they seemed to perceive the ball position closer than as it is. We concluded this phenomenon is occurred due to their alterations of depth perception.

Keywords

Biomechanical analysis Falls Stumble Elderly people 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant-in-Aid for challenging Exploratory Research (Grant Number 17H06291) and for JSPS Fellows (18J10752).

References

  1. 1.
    L.Johnson, J.G.Buckley, A.J.Scally, and D.B.Elliiott. Multifocal spectacles increase variability in toe clearance and risk of tripping in the elderly. Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, Vol. 48, No. 4, pp. 1466–1471, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Y.Kobayashi, H.Hobara, S.Matsushita, and M.Mochimaru. Key joint kinematic characteristics of the gait of fallers identified by principal component analysis. Journal of biomechanics, Vol. 47, pp. 2424–2429, 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    M.Morita, Y.Otaka, K.Kato, M.Yoshinaga, Y.Yasuoka, K.Kurakami, R.Kobayashi, and T.Mimura. Recognition of the external factor prior to the falling among older people (in japanese). Japanese journal of fall prevention, Vol. 5, No. 2, p. 132, 2018.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    D.J.Reinkensmeyer and M.L.Boninger. Technologies and combination therapies for enhancing movement training for people with a disability. Journal of neuro-engineering and rehabilitation, Vol. 9, No. 17, 2012.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    J.L.Robinson and G.L.Smidt. Quantitative gait evaluation in the clinic. Physical Therapy, Vol. 61, No. 3, pp. 351–353, 1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    J.M.Hausdorff, D.A.Rios, and H.K.Edelberg. Gait variability and fall risk in community-living older adults: A 1-year prospective study. Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation, Vol. 82, pp. 1050–1056, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    G.A.Mbourou, Y.Lajoie, and N.Teasdale. Step length variability at gait initiation in elderly fallers and non-fallers, and young adults. Gerontology, Vol. 49, pp. 21–26, 2001.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    J.B.Arnold, S.Mackintosh, S.Jones, and D.Thewlis. Differences in foot kinematics between young and older adults during walking. Gait & posture Vol. 39, pp. 689–694, 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    A.E.Patla and J.N.Vickers. How far ahead do we look when required to step on specific locations in the travel path during locomotion? Experimental Brain Research, Vol. 148, No. 1, pp. 133–138, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    S.R.Lord and J.Dayhew. Visual risk factors for falls in older people. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, Vol. 49, No. 5, pp. 508–515, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    S.R.Cummings, M.C.Nevitt, W.S.Browner, K.Stone, K.M.Fox, K.E.Ensrud, J.Cauley, D.Black, and T.M.Vogt. Risk factors for hip fracture in white women. The New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 332, No. 12, pp. 767–773, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    R.Q.Ivers, R.Norton, R.G.Cumming, M.Butler, and A.J.Campbell. Visual impairment and risk of hip fracture. American Journal of Epidemiology, Vol. 152, No. 7, pp. 633–639, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    J.Verghese, R.B.Lipton, C.B.Hall, G.Kuslansky, M.J.Katz, and H.Buschke. Abnormality of gait as a predictor of non-alzheimer’s dementia. The new England journal of medicine, Vol. 347, No. 22, pp. 1761–1768, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    M.F.Folstein and S.E.Folstein. “mini-mental state” a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of psychiatric research, Vol. 12, pp. 189–198, 1975.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    S.Katoh, H.Shimogaki, A. Onodera, H.Ueda-Ishibashi, K. Oikawa, K. Ikeda, K. Kosaka, K. Imai, and K. Hasegawa. Development of the revised version of Hasegawa’s Dementia Scale (HDS-R) (in japanese). Japanese journal of geriatric psychiatry, Vol. 2, No. 11, pp. 1339–1347, 1991.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Y.Imai and K.Hasegawa. The revised hasegawa’s dementia scale (hds-r) – evaluation of its usefulness as a screening test for dementia. Honk Kong Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 20–24, 1994.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    FY.Fujiwara, H.Suzuki, M.Yasunaga, M.Sugiyama, M.Ijuin, N.Sakuma, H.Inagaki, H.Iwasa, C.Ura, N.Yatomi, K.Ishii, A.M.Tokumaru, A.Homma, Z.Nasreddine, and S.Shinkai. Brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment in older japanese: Validation of the japanese version of the montreal cognitive assesment. Gerriatrics & Gerontology International, Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 225–232, 2010.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Z.S.Nasreddine, N.A.Phillips, V.Bédirian, S.Charbonneau, V.Whitehead, I.Collin, J.L.Cummings, and H.Chertkow. The Montreal cognitive assesment, MoCA: A brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, Vol. 53, No. 4, pp. 695–699, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    H. Yamaguchi, Y. Maki, and T. Yamagami. Yamaguchi fox-pigeon imitation test: A rapid test for dementia. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders, Vol. 29, No. 3, pp. 254–258, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    A.Cagnin, C.Bussè, N.Jelcic, F.Gnoato, M.Mitolo, and P.Caffarra. High specificity of MMSE pentagon scoring for diagnosis of prodromal dementia with Lewy bodies. Parkisonism and related disorders, Vol. 21, pp. 303–305, 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    H.Brodaty and C.M.Moore. The clock drawing test for dementia of the alzheimer’s type: A comparison of three scoring methods in a memory disorders clinic. International journal of geriatric psychiatry, Vol. 12, pp. 619–627, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    H.Makizako, H.Shimada, T.Doi, K.Tsutsumimoto, and T.Suzuki. Impact of physical frailty on disability in community-dwelling older adults: a prospective cohort study. BMJ Open, Vol. 5, No. 9, 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    E.Kelaiditi, M.Cesari, M.Canevelli, G.Abellan Van Kan, P.-J. Ousset, S.Gillette-Guyonnet, P.Ritz, F.Duveau, M.E.Soto, V.Provencher, F.Nourhashemi, A.Salva, P.Robert, S.Andrieu, Y.Rolland, J.Touchon, J.L.Fitten, and B.Vellas. Cognitive frailty: rational and definition from an (I.A.N.A./I.A.G.G) international consensus group. The Journal of Nutrition, Health & Aging, Vol. 17, No. 9, pp. 726–734, 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    R.D.Seidler, J.A.Bernard, T.B.Burutolu, B.W.Fling, M.T.Gordon, J.T.Gwin, Y.Kwak, and D.B.Lipps. Motor control and ageing: links to age-related brain structural functional, and biochemical effects. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral reviews, Vol. 34, pp. 721–733, 2010.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    L.F.Draganich and C.E.Kuo. The effects of walking speed on obstacle crossing in healthy young and healthy older adults. Journal of Biomechanics, Vol. 37, pp. 889–896, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    K.Uemura, M.Yamada, K.Nagai, and N.Ichihashi. Older adults at high risk of falling need more time for anticipatory postural adjustment in the precrossing phase of obstacle negotiation. Journal of Gerontology series A Biological sciences and Medical sciences, Vol. 66, No. 8, pp. 904–909, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    A.Murai and K.Yamane. A neuromuscular locomotion controller that realizes human-like responses to unexpected disturbances. Proceedings of IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, pp. 1997–2002, 2011.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    M.J.Pavol, T.M.Owings, K.T.Foley, and M.D.Grabiner. Mechanisms leading to a fall from an induced trip in healthy older adults. Journal of gerontology, Vol. 56A, No. 7, pp. M428–M437, 2001.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    S.Ishii, T.Tanaka, K.Shibasaki, Y.Ouchi, T.Kikutani, T.Higashiguchi, S.P.Obuchi, K.Ishikawa-Takata, H.Hirano, H.Kawai, T.Tsuji, and K.Iijima. Development of a simple screening test for sarcopenia in older adults. Geriatrics & Gerontology, Vol. 14, No. Suppl. 1, pp. 93–101, 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Emiko Uchiyama
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Toshihiro Mino
    • 1
  • Tomoki Tanaka
    • 1
  • Yosuke Ikegami
    • 1
  • Wataru Takano
    • 2
  • Yoshihiko Nakamura
    • 1
  • Katsuya Iijima
    • 2
  1. 1.The University of TokyoTokyoJapan
  2. 2.Osaka UniversityToyonaka-shi, OsakaJapan

Personalised recommendations