A Study on the Improvement of Walking Characteristics of the Elderly with Vibration Stimuli Applied to the Tibialis Anterior Tendon

Table 2

Angle profiles’ differences between the young adults and the elderly with NS and between the young adults and the elderly with all vibratory stimuli conditions of the threshold intensity (mean ± SD).

	Stance phase	LR	MSt	TSt	PSw
Ankle joint
Elderly with NS
with 180 Hz	4.73 ± 1.54		3.28 ± 0.16	4.63 ± 0.23	9.79 ± 1.40
with 190 Hz	4.48 ± 1.54			4.48 ± 0.26	9.59 ± 1.34
with 200 Hz	4.56 ± 1.48			4.49 ± 0.23	9.43 ± 1.29
Knee joint
Elderly with NS
with 180 Hz	5.24 ± 1.09	5.71 ± 0.32		5.57 ± 0.90	1.84 ± 0.71
with 190 Hz	5.31 ± 0.95	5.03 ± 0.29		5.95 ± 0.82	2.41 ± 0.67
with 200 Hz	5.22 ± 1.02	5.39 ± 0.33		5.59 ± 0.88	2.13 ± 0.69
Hip joint
Elderly with NS
with 180 Hz		7.32 ± 0.25
with 190 Hz					5.64 ± 0.40
with 200 Hz		7.46 ± 0.24

SD: standard deviation; NS: nonstimulated; LR: loading response; MSt: midstance; TSt: terminal-stance; PSw: preswing; the italic text indicates the increase in the profiles’ differences; the bold text indicates the decrease in the profiles’ differences. Statistical differences .