Biomechanical Analysis of Stroke Hemiplegic Patients During Sit-to-Stand Transfer / 医用生物力学

Due to damage to the hemi-advanced central nervous system of stroke hemiplegic patients, their ability of sit-to-stand transfer is impaired, and they are prone to fall during the sit-to-stand transfer. This article describes the characteristics of sit-to-stand transfer for hemiplegic patients at different foot placement from a biomechanical perspective, discusses the correlation between different features, analyzes the reasons for their fall, and describes the application of sit-to-stand transfer training in postoperative rehabilitation of hemiplegic patients， so as to provide references for postoperative rehabilitation of hemiplegic patients.

Interactions among Foot Placement, Trunk Control and Weight-bearing during Sit-to-stand Movement in Hemi-plegic Stroke Patients / 中国康复理论与实践

Objective To explore the interaction of foot placement, trunk control and weight-bearing (WB) during sit-to-stand (STS) movement. Methods 32 hemiplegic stroke patients (experimental group) and 32 healthy people (control group) were recruited and complet-ed STS movement with 3 different foot positions:ankle dorsiflexed 10° of both feet (BF), with the paretic foot posterior (PFP) or the undom-inant foot posterior (UDFP), with the non-paretic foot posterior (NPFP) or the dominant foot posterior (DFP). Balance function assessment system (model AL-080) was used for collecting the WB, WB asymmetry (WBasym), and the center of pressure of the buttocks in medial-lat-eral (CoPx) and anterior-posterior (CoPy) sway during STS movement. Results The control group had the mostly WB symmetry, and little trunk side movement in BF, and there was significant difference in all indicators compared with in DFP or UDFP. For the experiment group, the WB, WBasym and CoPx were different as BF from as NPFP (P<0.05);while all the indicators except CoPx were different from PFP. When PFP, the trunk moved to the non-paretic side, and then to paretic side, all the indicators were different from NPFP. When BF and NPFP of the experiment group compared with BF and DFP of the control group, all the indicators were different (P<0.05). CoPx and CoPy increased in the experiment group compared with the control group. CoPx negatively correlate with WBasym in the experiment group (r=-0.626, P<0.001) and in the control group (r=-0.776, P<0.001). Conclusion The trunk side movement affects weight-bearing symmetry, and foot placement can modify weight-bearing distribution during the STS movement in hemiplegic stroke patients.

Interactions among Foot Placement, Trunk Control and Weight-bearing during Sit-to-stand Movement in Hemiplegic Stroke Patients / 中国康复理论与实践

@#Objective To explore the interaction of foot placement, trunk control and weight-bearing (WB) during sit-to-stand (STS) movement. Methods 32 hemiplegic stroke patients (experimental group) and 32 healthy people (control group) were recruited and completed STS movement with 3 different foot positions: ankle dorsiflexed 10° of both feet (BF), with the paretic foot posterior (PFP) or the undominant foot posterior (UDFP), with the non-paretic foot posterior (NPFP) or the dominant foot posterior (DFP). Balance function assessment system (model AL-080) was used for collecting the WB, WB asymmetry (WBasym), and the center of pressure of the buttocks in medial-lateral (CoPx) and anterior-posterior (CoPy) sway during STS movement. Results The control group had the mostly WB symmetry, and little trunk side movement in BF, and there was significant difference in all indicators compared with in DFP or UDFP. For the experiment group, the WB, WBasym and CoPx were different as BF from as NPFP (P<0.05); while all the indicators except CoPx were different from PFP. When PFP, the trunk moved to the non-paretic side, and then to paretic side, all the indicators were different from NPFP. When BF and NPFP of the experiment group compared with BF and DFP of the control group, all the indicators were different (P<0.05). CoPx and CoPy increased in the experiment group compared with the control group. CoPx negatively correlate with WBasym in the experiment group (r=-0.626, P<0.001) and in the control group (r=-0.776, P<0.001). Conclusion The trunk side movement affects weight-bearing symmetry, and foot placement can modify weight-bearing distribution during the STS movement in hemiplegic stroke patients.

A model for selecting alternate foot placement during human locomotion

The selection of alternate foot placement is based on visual inputs.