Art D Kuo

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, D. C., DC, USA

Are you Art D Kuo?

Claim your profile

Publications (3)9.21 Total impact

  • Article: The effect of prosthetic foot push-off on mechanical loading associated with knee osteoarthritis in lower extremity amputees.
    [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Lower extremity amputation not only limits mobility, but also increases the risk of knee osteoarthritis of the intact limb. Dynamic walking models of non-amputees suggest that pushing-off from the trailing limb can reduce collision forces on the leading limb. These collision forces may determine the peak knee external adduction moment (EAM), which has been linked to the development of knee OA in the general population. We therefore hypothesized that greater prosthetic push-off would lead to reduced loading and knee EAM of the intact limb in unilateral transtibial amputees. Seven unilateral transtibial amputees were studied during gait under three prosthetic foot conditions that were intended to vary push-off. Prosthetic foot-ankle push-off work, intact limb knee EAM and ground reaction impulses for both limbs during step-to-step transition were measured. Overall, trailing limb prosthetic push-off work was negatively correlated with leading intact limb 1st peak knee EAM (slope=-.72±.22; p=.011). Prosthetic push-off work and 1st peak intact knee EAM varied significantly with foot type. The prosthetic foot condition with the least push-off demonstrated the largest knee EAM, which was reduced by 26% with the prosthetic foot producing the most push-off. Trailing prosthetic limb push-off impulse was negatively correlated with leading intact limb loading impulse (slope=-.34±.14; p=.001), which may help explain how prosthetic limb push-off can affect intact limb loading. Prosthetic feet that perform more prosthetic push-off appear to be associated with a reduction in 1st peak intact knee EAM, and their use could potentially reduce the risk and burden of knee osteoarthritis in this population.
    Gait & posture 07/2011; 34(4):502-7. · 2.58 Impact Factor
  • Article: Direction-dependent control of balance during walking and standing.
    Shawn M O'Connor, Arthur D Kuo
    [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Human walking has previously been described as "controlled falling." Some computational models, however, suggest that gait may also have self-stabilizing aspects requiring little CNS control. The fore-aft component of walking may even be passively stable from step to step, whereas lateral motion may be unstable and require motor control for balance, as through active foot placement. If this is the case, walking humans might rely less on integrative sensory feedback, such as vision, for anteroposterior (AP) than for mediolateral (ML) balance. We tested whether healthy humans (n=10) exhibit such direction-dependent control, by applying low-frequency perturbations to the visual field (a projected virtual hallway) and measuring foot placement during treadmill walking. We found step variability to be nearly 10 times more sensitive to ML than to AP perturbations, as quantified by the increase in root-mean-square step variability per unit change in perturbation amplitude. This is not simply due to poorer physiological sensitivity of vision in the AP direction: similar perturbations applied to quiet standing produced reversed direction dependence, with an AP sensitivity 2.3-fold greater than that of ML. Tandem (heel-to-toe) standing yielded ML sensitivity threefold greater than that of AP, suggesting that the base of support influences the stability of standing. Postural balance nevertheless appears to require continuous, integrative motor control for balance in all directions. In contrast, walking balance requires step-by-step, integrative control for balance, but mainly in the lateral direction. In the fore-aft direction, balance may be maintained through an "uncontrolled," yet passively stabilized, series of falls.
    Journal of Neurophysiology 07/2009; 102(3):1411-9. · 3.32 Impact Factor
  • Article: Endpoint force fluctuations reveal flexible rather than synergistic patterns of muscle cooperation.
    [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We developed a new approach to investigate how the nervous system activates multiple redundant muscles by studying the endpoint force fluctuations during isometric force generation at a multi-degree-of-freedom joint. We hypothesized that, due to signal-dependent muscle force noise, endpoint force fluctuations would depend on the target direction of index finger force and that this dependence could be used to distinguish flexible from synergistic activation of the musculature. We made high-gain measurements of isometric forces generated to different target magnitudes and directions, in the plane of index finger metacarpophalangeal joint abduction-adduction/flexion-extension. Force fluctuations from each target were used to calculate a covariance ellipse, the shape of which varied as a function of target direction. Directions with narrow ellipses were approximately aligned with the estimated mechanical actions of key muscles. For example, targets directed along the mechanical action of the first dorsal interosseous (FDI) yielded narrow ellipses, with 88% of the variance directed along those target directions. It follows the FDI is likely a prime mover in this target direction and that, at most, 12% of the force variance could be explained by synergistic coupling with other muscles. In contrast, other target directions exhibited broader covariance ellipses with as little as 30% of force variance directed along those target directions. This is the result of cooperation among multiple muscles, based on independent electromyographic recordings. However, the pattern of cooperation across target directions indicates that muscles are recruited flexibly in accordance with their mechanical action, rather than in fixed groupings.
    Journal of Neurophysiology 10/2008; 100(5):2455-71. · 3.32 Impact Factor

Institutions

  • 2011
    • U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
      Washington, D. C., DC, USA
  • 2009
    • University of Michigan
      • Department of Biomedical Engineering
      Ann Arbor, MI, USA