Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of backward treadmill gait training between underwater and ground environments on strength, proprioception, and walking ability in persons with stroke. Design: Randomized control trial. Methods: Twenty eight subjects participated in the study in which they were randomly assigned to either the underwater backward treadmill training (UBTT) group (n=13) or the BTT group (n=15). In both groups, forward gait training was performed for 20 minutes on the ground treadmill. The UBTT group performed backward gait on an underwater treadmill for 20 minutes while the BTT group performed backward gait on a ground treadmill for 20 minutes. The gait training in each group was performed twice a week for a total of six weeks. Muscle strength, proprioception, and gait ability was assessed using a digital power meter, joint angle recurrence method using the smartphone protractor application, the Figure-of-Eight walk test (F8W) and the functional gait assessment (FGA) respectively. Results: Both groups showed significant improvement in strength, F8W and FGA scores after training (p<0.05). However, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups. Both groups showed significant improvement in proprioception after training (p<0.05). In the comparison between the two groups, there was a greater significant change in the UBTT group for joint proprioception (p<0.05). Conclusions: In this study, it was found that both backward treadmill gait training programs were effective on strength, proprioception, and gait ability, and that underwater training was particularly effective on proprioception compared to ground training.

Objective:The purpose of this study is to find out the reliability and validity of the newly updated Balancia 2.5 program using Wii balance board through equipment that can measure center of pressure data with the precision. Design: Cross-sectional study Methods: Twenty-seven healthy adults participated in the study. The subjects were assessed for static balance ability by Accusway, and were assessed for static balance ability on Wii balance board connected to theBalancia 2.5 program.To limit postural fluctuations due to stare, the subjects were asked to look at a 15 cm dot drawn 3 m in front of them for 30 seconds with their eyes open. Static balance ability data such as path length and sway velocity were extracted from all measurement tools.Intra-rater and inter-rater reliability and validity were extracted through intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: The intra-rater reliability that the same rater shows consistent results through test-retest was a high level at ICC＝0.968 (0.926∼0.986), and inter-rater reliability that the requires consistent results even when measured by different raters was a high level at ICC＝0.943 (0.870∼0.975). The validity was a high level at ICC＝0.948 (0.881∼0.977), which shows whether the measurement tool is properly measuring what it is intended to measure. Conclusions: The Balancia 2.5 program, newly updated through this study, proved to be a program with high reliability and validity in evaluating static balance ability like the existingBalancia 2.0 program.

Since there are many different assessments related to gait speed, it is important to determine the concurrent validity of each measure so that they can be used interchangeably. Our study aimed to investigate the concurrent validity of gait speed measured by the 10 m walk test (10 MWT) and the gold standard gait analysis system, the GAITRite system, for people with chronic ankle instability (CAI). For 16 people with CAI, 4 evaluations of the 10 MWT and 4 evaluations of the GAITRite system were performed (a comfortable gait speed for 2 evaluations; a maximal gait speed for 2 evaluations). We used intraclass correlations [ICC (2,1), absolute agreement] and Bland–Altman plots to analyze the relationship between the gait speed of the two measures. The absolute agreement between the 10 MWT and the GAITRite system is at the comfortable gait speed [ICC = 0.66; p < 0.001)], and the maximal gait speed [ICC = 0.68; p < 0.001)] showed fair to good agreement. Both gait speeds had a proportional bias; the limit of agreement (LOA) was large (0.50 at the comfortable gait speed and 0.60 at the maximal gait speed). Regression-based Bland–Altman plots were created for the comfortable gait speed (R2 = 0.54, p < 0.001) and the maximal gait speed (R2 = 0.78, p < 0.001). The regression-based LOA ranged from 0.45 to 0.66 m/s for the comfortable gait speed and 1.09 to 1.37 m/s for the maximal gait speed. Our study suggests that it is undesirable to mix the 10 MWT and the GAITRite system gait speed measurements in people with CAI. Each measure should not be recorded by the same evaluation tool and referenced to normative data.

Objective:The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of the difference in mask filters on the respiration rate of healthy people. Design: A randomized cross-over design.Methods: A total of 15 subjects were selected for this study (n=15). After filling out the Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire, the selected participants abstained from caffeinated beverages and meals 30 minutes before and sat in a chair 10 minutes before stabilizing their breathing. Afterwards, the lung function test was performed 3 times for each mask, and the maximum value was used. The provided masks were Mask Free, Dental Mask, KF80, and KF94. Exhalation was measured for 6 seconds for each mask, and breathing was stabilized by repeating inhalation and exhalation until the next time.Results: In this study, the difference in respiratory function according to the mask type was statistically significant except for FEV1 and FVC (p＜0.05). As a result of post-hoc analysis, FVC, FEV1, PEF, and FEF values were significantly lower than those of the control group not wearing a mask (p＜0.05). When wearing KF94, FVC, FEV1, PEF25-25%, and FEF were significantly lower than when wearing a dental mask (p＜0.05). When wearing a KF80 mask, it was significantly lower in FVC and FEV1 than when wearing a dental mask (p＜0.05). In FEV1/FVC, the difference by mask type was not statistically significant (p＜0.05), but it was lower than the spirometry standard of COPD patients (FEV1/FVC＜0.7). Conclusions: As Now that wearing a mask is essential, it has been confirmed that the mask affects the respiratory rate.Therefore, in the case of healthy adults, it is recommended to rest after wearing a mask if attention deficit or headache occurs. People with low breathing capacity are recommended to have low-intensity activities and frequent rest periods after wearing a mask.