Posturography and locomotor tests of dynamic balance after long-duration spaceflight

Author:

Cohen Helen S.1,Kimball Kay T.2,Mulavara Ajitkumar P.3,Bloomberg Jacob J.4,Paloski William H.45

Affiliation:

1. Bobby R. Alford Department of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA

2. Statistical Design and Analysis, Austin, TX, USA

3. Universities Space Research Association, Palmdale, CA, USA

4. Neuroscience Research Laboratories, NASA/Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX, USA

5. Center for Neuromotor and Biomechanics Research, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA

Abstract

The currently approved objective clinical measure of standing balance in astronauts after space flight is the Sensory Organization Test battery of computerized dynamic posturography. No tests of walking balance are currently approved for standard clinical testing of astronauts. This study determined the sensitivity and specificity of standing and walking balance tests for astronauts before and after long-duration space flight. Astronauts were tested on an obstacle avoidance test known as the Functional Mobility Test (FMT) and on the Sensory Organization Test using sway-referenced support surface motion with eyes closed (SOT 5) before and six months after (n=15) space flight on the International Space Station. They were tested two to seven days after landing. Scores on SOT tests decreased and scores on FMT increased significantly from pre- to post-flight. In other words, post-flight scores were worse than pre-flight scores. SOT and FMT scores were not significantly related. ROC analyses indicated supra-clinical cut-points for SOT 5 and for FMT. The standard clinical cut-point for SOT 5 had low sensitivity to post-flight astronauts. Higher cut-points increased sensitivity to post-flight astronauts but decreased specificity to pre-flight astronauts. Using an FMT cut-point that was moderately highly sensitive and highly specific plus SOT 5 at the standard clinical cut-point was no more sensitive than SOT 5, alone. FMT plus SOT 5 at higher cut-points was more specific and more sensitive. The total correctly classified was highest for FMT, alone, and for FMT plus SOT 5 at the highest cut-point. These findings indicate that standard clinical comparisons are not useful for identifying problems. Testing both standing and walking balance will be more likely to identify balance deficits.

Publisher

IOS Press

Subject

Clinical Neurology,Sensory Systems,Otorhinolaryngology,General Neuroscience

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3