Effectiveness of different visual biofeedback signals for human balance improvement

- Effectiveness of different VBF signals is compared.
- VBF is the most effective in the body segment from which the signal is sensed.
- The CoP position and L5 position provide the best signals for VBF.
- Upper body segments have small impact on controlling lower segments, and vice versa.
- Accelerometers offer new opportunities to optimize VBF systems.

The aim of this study was to examine the effectiveness of visual biofeedback (VBF) signals from a force platform and accelerometer sensors placed on different body segments. The study was performed on 20 young subjects during standing on a firm and foam support surface with a VBF signal sensed from CoP, lower trunk (L5) and upper trunk (Th4). The VBF signal was controlled by 2D-movement of chosen body segment, which was presented as a red point on a monitor screen. Location of VBF signal had a significant effect on each postural parameter of CoP and trunk segments. RMS and amplitudes of postural sway in medial-lateral and anterior-posterior directions decreased during standing on both types of support surface due to VBF. L5-VBF and CoP-VBF significantly reduced CoP displacements and lower trunk tilts. Th4-VBF reduced upper trunk tilts. Frequency analysis of postural sway revealed a decrease of power spectral density (PSD) values in low frequency range (0.02-0.3 Hz) and an increase of PSD values in higher frequency range (0.5-1.4 Hz) in the VBF conditions during the stance on the firm surface in anterior-posterior direction. Reduction of body sway was the most significant in the body segment from which the VBF signal was sensed. The CoP position and L5 position provided the best signals for VBF. Changes in frequency ranges of body sway suggest voluntary activation of balance control. The results open new opportunities to optimize VBF system for balance improvement using accelerometers.