This longitudinal study aimed to compare static postural stability in women between early pregnancy, advanced pregnancy, and at 2 and 6 months postpartum. Forty-five pregnant women were enrolled and 31 completed the protocol. Data were collected at 7–16 and 34–39 weeks gestation, and at 6–10 and 26–30 weeks postpartum. For each subject, the center of foot pressure path length and mean velocity (with directional subcomponents) were computed from 30-s long quiet-standing trials on a stationary force plate with eyes open or closed. The body mass, stance width, and sleep duration within 24 h before testing were also recorded. Static postural stability was not different between pregnancy and postpartum, except for the anterior posterior sway tested in the eyes-closed condition, which was significantly increased in late pregnancy compared to that at 2 and 6 months postpartum. Pregnant/postpartum women’s body mass weakly positively correlated with anterior-posterior sway in the eyes-closed condition and their stance width weakly positively correlated with the anterior-posterior sway in the eyes-open condition. No effect of sleep duration on postural sway was found. Our findings indicate that under visual deprivation conditions women in advanced pregnancy may have decreased static stability compared to their non-pregnant state.
posterior displacement of the projection of the center of gravity of the lenth of approximately 4 mm in late pregnancy comparing to the beginning of pregnancy. The displacement may be the result of the body's adaptation to the increased mass in the anterior trunk area in late pregnancy. No discrepancy was found when comparing the average center of gravity location in the early pregnancy and after delivery.We concluded that the change of the center of gravity location in late pregnancy is temporary and two months after delivery the vertical projection of the center of gravity is located as it was at the beginning of pregnancy.
To determine the impact of body weight on quiet standing postural sway characteristics in young women, this research compared spontaneous oscillations of the center of foot pressure (COP) between 32 obese (BMI: 36.4 ± 5.2 kg/m
2
), and 26 normal-weight (BMI: 21.4 ± 1.5 kg/m
2
) women and assessed the influence of obesity treatment and body weight reduction on postural sway. Trajectories of the COP were assessed while the subjects were standing quietly with eyes open (EO) and closed (EC). Both in the sagittal (AP) and frontal (ML) planes the sway range, average velocity, and maximal velocity of COP were calculated. Moreover, the total average and maximal velocities were computed. In the obese group, the tests were performed twice–before and after the obesity treatment. A greater (18% in EC) AP sway range and a substantial reduction of ML sway (25% in EO, 22% in EC) were observed in the obese women. The total COP velocities (average and maximal) were decreased in obese women (20% and 20% in EO) as well as the velocities in the frontal plane (EO: 33%, 41%; EC: 34%, 40%). Body weight reduction resulted in significant changes in postural sway. The following parameters increased: ML sway range (28% in EO), average (20% in EO, 16% in EC) and maximal ML (20% in EO) velocities. The results indicate that young obese women in the habitual standing position are characterized by the destabilizing influence of mass in the sagittal plane only in the absence of a visual control. This effect is dominated by the stabilizing mass effect in the frontal plane, which affects overall postural stability when standing. The reduction of body mass enables a decrease in ML static stability, likely due to natural changes in the base of support while standing.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.