Hip abductor proprioception contributes to the control of mediolateral foot placement, which varies with step-bystep fluctuations in pelvis dynamics. Prior work has used hip abductor vibration as a sensory probe to investigate the link between vibration within a single step and subsequent foot placement. Here, we extended prior findings by applying time and location varying vibration in every step, seeking to predictably manipulate the continuous, step-by-step relationship between pelvis dynamics and foot placement. We compared participants' (n=32; divided into two groups of 16 with slightly different vibration control) gait behavior across four treadmill walking conditions: 1) No feedback; 2) Random feedback, with vibration unrelated to pelvis motion; 3) Augmented feedback, with vibration designed to evoke proprioceptive feedback paralleling the actual pelvis motion; 4) Disrupted feedback, with vibration designed to evoke proprioceptive feedback inversely related to pelvis motion. We hypothesized that the relationship between pelvis dynamics and foot placement would be strengthened by Augmented feedback but weakened by Disrupted feedback. For both participant groups, the strength of the relationship between pelvis dynamics at the start of a step and foot placement at the end of a step was significantly (p≤0.0002) influenced by the feedback condition. The link between pelvis dynamics and foot placement was strongest with Augmented feedback, but not significantly weakened with Disrupted feedback, partially supporting our hypotheses. Our approach to augmenting proprioceptive feedback during gait may have implications for clinical populations with a weakened relationship between pelvis motion and foot placement.

Hip abductor proprioception contributes to the control of mediolateral foot placement, which varies with step-by-step fluctuations in pelvis dynamics. While prior work has used hip abductor vibration as a sensory perturbation to investigate this role of hip proprioception, we here tested whether time-varying vibration can predictably manipulate the relationship between pelvis dynamics and foot placement. We compared participants’ (n=32; divided into two groups of 16 with slightly different vibration control) gait behavior across four treadmill walking conditions: 1) No feedback; 2) Random feedback, with vibration unrelated to pelvis motion; 3) Augmented feedback, with vibration designed to evoke proprioceptive feedback paralleling the actual pelvis motion; 4) Disrupted feedback, with vibration designed to evoke proprioceptive feedback inversely related to pelvis motion. We hypothesized that the relationship between pelvis dynamics and foot placement would be strengthened by Augmented feedback but weakened by Disrupted feedback. For both participant groups, the strength of the relationship between pelvis dynamics at the start of a step and foot placement at the end of a step was significantly (p≤0.0002) influenced by the feedback condition. This metric was highest with Augmented feedback, but not significantly reduced with Disrupted feedback, partially supporting our hypotheses. Our approach to augmenting proprioceptive feedback during gait may have implications for clinical populations with a weakened relationship between pelvis motion and foot placement.