Step-by-step foot placement control, relative to the center of mass (CoM) kinematic state, is generally considered a dominant mechanism for maintenance of gait stability. By adequate (mediolateral) positioning of the center of pressure with respect to the CoM, the ground reaction force generates a moment that prevents falling. In healthy individuals, foot placement is complemented mainly by ankle moment control ensuring stability. To evaluate possible compensatory relationships between step-by-step foot placement and complementary ankle moments, we investigated the degree of (active) foot placement control during steady-state walking, and under either foot placement-, or ankle moment constraints. Thirty healthy participants walked on a treadmill, while full-body kinematics, ground reaction forces and EMG activities were recorded. As a replication of earlier findings, we first showed step-by-step foot placement is associated with preceding CoM state and hip ab-/adductor activity during steady-state walking. Tight control of foot placement appears to be important at normal walking speed because there was a limited change in the degree of foot placement control despite the presence of a foot placement constraint. At slow speed, the degree of foot placement control decreased substantially, suggesting that tight control of foot placement is less essential when walking slowly. Step-by-step foot placement control was not tightened to compensate for constrained ankle moments. Instead compensation was achieved through increases in step width and stride frequency.

External lateral stabilization can help identify stability control mechanisms during steady-state walking. The degree of step-by-step foot placement control and step width are known to decrease when walking with external lateral stabilization. Here, we investigated the effect of external lateral stabilization on ankle moment control in healthy participants. Ankle moment control complements foot placement, by allowing a corrective center-of-pressure shift once the foot has been placed. This is reflected by a model predicting this center-of-pressure shift based on the preceding foot placement error. Here, the absolute explained variance accounted for by this model decreased when walking with external lateral stabilization. In other words, we found a reduction in the contribution of step-by-step ankle moment control to mediolateral gait stability when externally stabilized. Concurrently, foot placement error and the average center-of-pressure shift remained unchanged.

Falls are a problem, especially for older adults. Placing our feet accurately relative to the center-of-mass helps us to prevent falling during gait. The degree of foot placement control with respect to the center-of mass kinematic state is decreased in older as compared to young adults. Here, we attempted to train mediolateral foot placement control in healthy older adults. Ten older adults trained by walking on shoes with a narrow ridge underneath (LesSchuh), restricting mediolateral center-of-pressure shifts. As a training effect, we expected improved foot placement control during normal walking. A training session consisted of a normal walking condition, followed by a training condition on LesSchuh and finally an after-effect condition. Participants performed six of such training sessions, spread across three weeks. As a control, before the first training session, we included two similar sessions, but on normal shoes only. We evaluated whether a training effect was observed across sessions and weeks in a repeated-measures design. Whilst walking with LesSchuh, the magnitude of foot placement error reduced half-a-millimeter between sessions within a week (cohen’s d = 0.394). As a training effect in normal walking, the magnitude of foot placement errors was significantly lower compared to the control week, by one millimeter in weeks 2 (cohen’s d = 0.686) and 3 (cohen’s d = 0.780) and by two millimeters in week 4 (cohen’s d = 0.875). Local dynamic stability of normal walking also improved significantly. More precise foot placement may thus have led to improved stability. It remains to be determined whether the training effects were the result of walking on LesSchuh or from repeated treadmill walking itself. Moreover, enhancement of mechanisms beyond the scope of our outcome measures may have improved stability. At the retention test, gait stability returned to similar levels as in the control week. Yet, a reduction in foot placement error persisted.

Mediolateral gait stability can be maintained by coordinating our foot placement with respect to the center-of-mass (CoM) kinematic state. Neurological impairments can reduce the degree of foot placement control. For individuals with such impairments, interventions that could improve foot placement control could thus contribute to improved gait stability. In this study we aimed to better understand two potential interventions, by investigating their effect in neurologically intact individuals. The degree of foot placement control can be quantified based on a foot placement model, in which the CoM position and velocity during swing predict subsequent foot placement. Previously, perturbing foot placement with a force-field resulted in an enhanced degree of foot placement control as an after-effect. Moreover, timed muscle vibration enhanced the degree of foot placement control whilst the vibration was applied. Here, we replicated these two findings and further investigated whether Q1) timed muscle vibration leads to an after-effect and Q2) whether combining timed muscle vibration with force-field perturbations leads to a larger after-effect, as compared to force-field perturbations only. In addition, we evaluated several potential contributors to the degree of foot placement control, by considering foot placement errors, CoM variability and the CoM position gain ( beta pos ) of the foot placement model, next to the R 2 measure as the degree of foot placement control. Timed muscle vibration led to a higher degree of foot placement control as an after-effect (Q1). However, combining timed muscle vibration and force-field perturbations did not lead to a larger after-effect, as compared to following force-field perturbations only (Q2). Furthermore, we showed that the improved degree of foot placement control following force-field perturbations and during/following muscle vibration, did not reflect diminished foot placement errors. Rather, participants demonstrated a stronger active response (higher beta pos ) as well as higher CoM variability.

Mediolateral ankle moment control contributes to gait stability. Ankle moments can be constrained by walking with a shoe with a ridge underneath the sole, narrowing the mediolateral support surface. In our previous study, such ankle moment constraints resulted in an increased step width and a decrease in the degree of foot placement control, as defined by the percentage of variance in foot placement that can be explained by CoM state. However, since our previous study was performed on a split-belt treadmill and the narrow ridge could fit inside the gap between the belts, it is not evident whether these effects can be attributed to the constrained ankle moment control or to avoidance of this gap. Therefore, we investigated if the effects of ankle moment constraints are dependent on whether participants walk on a normal treadmill or a split-belt treadmill. We included fourteen healthy young adults. Walking with constrained ankle moment control resulted in a wider step width on both treadmills Yet, the increase in step width was larger on the split-belt treadmill compared to on the normal treadmill We only found a decreased degree of foot placement control on the split-belt treadmill, whilst the degree of foot placement control increased on the normal treadmill. We conclude that the effects of ankle moment constraints reported in our previous study were confounded by the use of a split-belt treadmill For future research, we recommend using a normal treadmill whenever possible, because the gap in a split-belt treadmill might affect gait parameters.

Step-by-step foot placement control, accommodating for natural variations in center-of-mass state, ensures stability during steady-state gait. Current understanding of this foot placement mechanisms is primarily based on findings during treadmill walking. However, contextual differences might hamper generalization of these findings towards overground walking, and ultimately daily life gait. This study investigated whether foot placement control manifests itself differently during overground as compared to treadmill walking in healthy young adults. 14 young adults walked at comfortable walking speed, both on the treadmill and overground in a figure-8 path. During overground walking we found a significant relationship between the step width/step length and the center-of-mass state during the swing phase of walking, capturing foot placement control with the same linear model as during treadmill walking. Contrary to what was hypothesized, we found a significant lower foot placement precision during overground walking for the step width model with center-of-mass state at the start of the swing phase as predictor, complemented by a wider average step width. Moreover, during overground walking participants responded less strongly to a deviation in center-of-mass position, yet significantly stronger to deviations in center-of-mass velocity at the end of the step for both the step width/step length models. Exploratory analysis showed a larger relative contribution of velocity feedback during overground walking as compared to treadmill walking. These differences warrant caution in generalizing foot placement findings during treadmill walking to overground walking and might be promising for the estimation of foot placement control in daily life gait.