@TomBuurke @JPhysiol@DynamicWalking Overall I think that the implication here is that the adaptation process of step time asymmetry may be different to the longer time-course of adaptation in step length asymmetry.
@TomBuurke @JPhysiol@DynamicWalking That's a good observation. Some things to consider: 1) stance time and step time asymmetry may have somewhat different time-courses and 2) conflicting results on time-course of step time asymmetry where some show gradual change and others more abrupt change.
@TomBuurke @JPhysiol@DynamicWalking other work suggest a time-course of step time asymmetry much quicker than step length asymmetry where much of the change is achieved after ~100 strides: https://t.co/SwhUBRw1Jm and https://t.co/Q8N3sQt95r
@TomBuurke @JPhysiol@DynamicWalking Thanks Tom. We didn't analyze the changes in step time asymmetry across the adaptation periods because all participants had prior exposure to split-belt walking (from a training visit and previous data collection visits) that likely would influence the rate of adaptation