Accuracy and precision of simpler and lower-cost technologies to measure the initial lean angle, step length and step velocity for forward lean releases.

Current technologies to measure the maximum forward lean angle, step length and velocity in a clinical setting are neither simple nor cheap. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy and precision of four live and one post-processing measurement methods compared to the 3D motion analysis gold standard. Twelve healthy younger adults recovered balance, after being released from six randomly ordered forward initial lean angles, using four different live measurement methods: LabVIEW, load cell, inclinometer and protractor. The initial lean angle, step length and velocity were also calculated in post-processing using 2D video analysis and 3D motion analysis. The LabVIEW method was the most accurate and precise, followed by the protractor, inclinometer and load cell methods. The load cell method was the most complex, followed by the LabVIEW, inclinometer and protractor methods. The LabVIEW method was the most expensive, followed by the load cell, inclinometer and protractor methods. Video analysis was sufficiently accurate and precise, equal in complexity and much less expensive than the gold standard. Simpler and lower-cost technologies to measure the initial lean angle, step length and velocity are sufficiently accurate and precise (live: protractor, post-processing: video analysis) to potentially use in a clinical setting.

Effects of age and lean direction on the threshold of single-step balance recovery in younger, middle-aged and older adults.

Several studies have quantified and compared balance recovery between healthy younger and older adults, using a variety of large postural perturbations and loss of balance directions. However, to the best of our knowledge, no studies at the threshold of balance recovery, where avoiding a fall is not always possible, have included middle-aged adults. We thus determined the maximum lean angle from which 20 younger, 16 middle-aged and 16 older healthy adults could be suddenly released and still recover balance using a single step for forward, sideways and backward leans. Results showed that the maximum lean angles of younger adults were 23% greater than middle-aged adults and 48% greater than older adults. The maximum lean angles for forward leans were 23% greater than sideways leans and 22% greater than backward leans. These declines with age and lean direction were associated with declines in response initiation, execution and geometry. Finally exponential regressions showed that the critical ages at which the ability to recover balance and avoid a fall significantly decreases were 51.0, 60.6 and 69.9 yrs for forward, sideways and backward leans, respectively. Therefore, we have demonstrated that age affects the ability to recover balance nearly a decade earlier than the rate of falls. Future studies should thus not only include older adults over 65 yrs, but also middle-aged adults under 65 yrs, or recruit all ages from 18 to 85 yrs. Finally, the critical ages identified in this study may justify an earlier screening of aging adults to prevent future falls, especially the first fall.