Postural control performance of active and inactive older adults assessed through postural tasks with different levels of difficulty

Magalhães, Gabriela Vigorito; Razuk, Milena; Vieira, Leonardo Araújo; Rinaldi, Natalia Madalena

doi:10.1590/S1980-657420220015421

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Motriz: Revista de Educação Física

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Neural Control of Movement • Motriz: rev. educ. fis. 28 • 2022 • https://doi.org/10.1590/S1980-657420220015421 copy

Postural control performance of active and inactive older adults assessed through postural tasks with different levels of difficulty

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract

Aim:

To investigate postural control between active (AOA) and inactive (IOA) older adults and active young adults (YA) due to the difficulty level of the postural task.

Methods:

25 active YA, 31 AOA, and 30 IOA were invited to perform postural tasks with eyes open and closed: bipedal stance on a rigid surface, bipedal stance on an unstable surface, semi-tandem stance on a rigid surface, and semi-tandem stance on an unstable surface.

Results:

IOA (0.74 cm) presented higher COP displacement amplitude in the mediolateral direction than AOA (0.64 cm) only in bipedal stance on an unstable surface with eyes closed condition (p ≤ 0.0001). In relation to frequency variables, IOA (0.37 Hz) presented a greater frequency band with 50% of the spectral power in the mediolateral direction than AOA (0.28 Hz) in all experimental conditions, except for semi-tandem stance on a rigid surface (p ≤ .0001). AOA (0.62 cm | 0.28 Hz) and IOA (0.67 cm | 0.37 Hz) presented an increase in time/frequency variables in both directions (anterior-posterior and mediolateral) than YA (0.52 cm | 0.17 Hz) (p ≤ 0.0001) that indicates a worse performance of postural control as the level of task difficulty increased, such as unstable base with eyes open and closed.

Conclusion:

Older adults tend to present greater COP sway and velocity when subjected to complex tasks compared with younger, which is more evident in older adults physically inactive. This could be considered an adaptive strategy by older adults to minimize the risk of losing balance and, consequently, falling.

Keywords
postural control; aging; physical exercise; posturographic variables

	Groups
Variables	IOA (N = 31)	AOA (N = 30)	YA (N = 25)	p-value
Age (years)	66.7 (± 4.4)^a a Different from young adults.	65.1 (± 4.2)^a a Different from young adults.	23.1 (± 4.4)	0.001
Body mass (kg)	68.2 (±10.5)	66.47 (± 9.6)	67.38 (± 14.1)	0.894
Height (m)	1.6 (± 0.1)^a a Different from young adults.	1.6 (± 0.1)^a a Different from young adults.	1.7 (± 0.1)	0.001
BMI (kg/m²)	27.5 (± 3.6)^a a Different from young adults.	26.8 (± 3.1)^a a Different from young adults.	23.4 (± 2.8)	0.001
Mini-Mental State Exam (points)	27.8 (±1.4)	27.9 (± 1.7)	-	0.804
Baecke Questionnaire (points)	3.8 (± 1.1)^a, a Different from young adults. ^b b Different from active older adults.	13.9 (± 4.3)^a a Different from young adults.	8.9 (± 1.4)	0.000
MiniBESTest (points)	22.1 (± 3.9)^a, a Different from young adults. ^b b Different from active older adults.	25.1 (± 2.1)	-	0.001
Right plantar skin sensitivity score (points)	25.1 (± 4.9)^a a Different from young adults.	25.8 (± 5.2)	18.9 (± 6.7)	0.001
Left plantar skin sensitivity score (points)	25.2 (± 5.1)^a a Different from young adults.	25.5 (± 5.2)^a a Different from young adults.	18.6 (± 6.8)	0.001

Variables	Groups	Condition	Vision	GroupCondition Vision
MANCOVA	Wilk's lambda = 0.719, F_4,164 = 7.337, p ≤0.0001, η_p² = 0.152	Wilk's lambda = 0.036, F_6,78 = 344.258, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.964	Wilk's lambda = 0.118, F_6,78 = 305.343, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.882	Wilk's lambda = 0.737, F_12,156 = 2.14, p = 0.017, η_p² = 0.141
ANCOVA
MSA_AP	F_2,83 = 15.071, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.266	F_3,249 = 699.200, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.894	F_1,83 = 494.291, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.856	F_6,249 = 1.651, p = 0.134, η_p² = 0.038
MSA_ML	F_2,83 = 14.778, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.263	F_3,249 = 617.850, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.882	F_1,83 = 544.760, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.868	F_6,249 = 4.060, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.089
MANCOVA	Wilk's lambda = 0.758, F_4,164 = 6.099, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.129	Wilk's lambda = 0.078, F_6,78 = 152.767, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.922	Wilk's lambda = 0.159, F_2,82 = 217.263, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.841	Wilk's lambda = 0.684, F_12,156 = 2.720, p = 0.002, η_p² = 0,173
ANCOVA
VEL_AP	F_2,83 = 12.572, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.233	F_3,249 = 295.685, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.781	F_1,83 = 244.245, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.746	F_6,249 = 2.926, p = 0.009, η_p² = 0.066
VEL_ML	F_2,83 = 9.332, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.184	F_3,249 = 450.881, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.845	F_1,83 = 439.084, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.841	F_6,249 = 5.257, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.112

Variables	Group	Condition	Vision	GroupConditionVision
MANCOVA	Wilk's lambda = 0.705, F_4,164 = 7.842, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.161	Wilk's lambda = 0.085, F_6,78 = 139.832, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.910	Wilk's lambda = 0.223, F_2,82 = 142.534, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.777	Wilk's lambda = 0.733, F_12,156 = 2.184, p = 0.015, η_p² = 0.144
ANCOVA
FREQ50_AP	F_2,83 = 6.776, p = 0.0002, η_p² = 0.140	F_3,249 = 124.163, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.599	F_1,83 = 35.516, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.300	F_6,249 = 0.907, p = 0.49, η_p² = 0.021
FREQ50_ML	F_2,83 = 8.896, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.177	F_3,249 = 244.465, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.747	F_1,83 = 263.045, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.760	F_6,249 = 2.191, p = 0.044, η_p² = 0.050
MANCOVA	Wilk's lambda = 0.894, F_4,164 = 2.352, p = 0.056, η_p² = 0.054	Wilk's lambda = 0.109, F_6,78 = 106.723, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.891	Wilk's lambda = 0.649, F_2,82 = 22.152, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.351	Wilk's lambda = 0.719, F_12,156 = 2.329, p = 0.009, η_p² = 0.152
ANCOVA
FREQ80_AP	F_2,83 = 4.338, p = 0.016, η_p² = 0.095	F_3,249 = 30.657, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.270	F_1,83 = 30.054, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.266	F_6,249 = 1.636, p = .138, η_p² = 0.038
FREQ80_ML	F_2,83 = 2.744, p = 0.070, η_p² = 0.062	F_3,249 = 140.745, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.629	F_1,83 = 0.323, p ≤ 0.0001, η_p² = 0.266	F_6,249 = 2.882, p = 0.010, η_p² = 0.065

Universidade Estadual Paulista Universidade Estadual Paulista, Av. 24-A, 1515, 13506-900 Rio Claro, SP/Brasil, Tel.: (55 19) 3526-4330 - Rio Claro - SP - Brazil
E-mail: motriz.rc@unesp.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] Associate Editor: Giordano Bonuzzi0000-0002-3751-2857. ¹Universidade Estadual do Piaui, Picos, PI, Brasil. ²Programa de Graduação em Cinesiologia, Universidade Federal do Vale do São Francisco, Petrolina, PE. Brazil. E-mail: giordanomgb@gmail.com.