Star excursion balance test scores under different conditions: Effects of arms position and shoe-wear

Sogut, Bensu; Harput, Gülcan; Tunay, Volga Bayrakçı

doi:10.1016/j.jbmt.2021.10.011

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A closer look at the previously reported studies (Patel et al, 2014 ; Hébert-Losier, 2017 ; Bostrom et al, 2018 ; Hill et al, 2019 ; Objero et al, 2019 ; Wdowski et al, 2021 ; Sogut et al, 2022 ) however reveals that the aforementioned studies only represent indirect comparisons as different methodologies (e.g., standing, walking, mobility, or reaching tasks) were used and only children/adolescents or young adults were investigated. In contrast, a direct comparison between children, adolescents, and young adults in a single study has not been carried out so far.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 64%

“…Further, Hill et al ( 2019 ) examined children aged 10.6 ± 0.5 years and stated for the free vs. the restricted arm movement condition significantly greater YBT-LQ performances (i.e., all directions and CS) and a faster balance beam walking. Finally, Sogut et al ( 2022 ) recently studied young adults (mean age: 22.7 ± 1.9 years) and again found significantly greater YBT-LQ performances (i.e., PM and PL reach distances and CS) during arms free than arms restricted condition. What are likely reasons for a better postural control during free compared to restricted arm movement?…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…For example, the arms are fixed at the hips or placed flat across the chest. However, it has been shown in several studies (Patel et al, 2014 ; Hébert-Losier, 2017 ; Bostrom et al, 2018 ; Hill et al, 2019 ; Objero et al, 2019 ; Wdowski et al, 2021 ; Sogut et al, 2022 ) that the restriction of arm movement leads to a deterioration of balance performance (e.g., reduced ability to minimize postural sway), especially in tasks with a high difficulty level. This finding seems to be independent of the subjects’ age, as both youth (Hill et al, 2019 ; Wdowski et al, 2021 ) and young adults (Patel et al, 2014 ; Hébert-Losier, 2017 ; Bostrom et al, 2018 ; Objero et al, 2019 ) showed better balance performance with vs. without the use of arm movement.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effect of Arm Movement and Task Difficulty on Balance Performance in Children, Adolescents, and Young Adults

Muehlbauer

Hill

Heise

et al. 2022

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundStudies have shown that restricted compared to free arm movement negatively affects balance performance during balance assessment and this is reinforced when the level of task difficulty (e.g., varying stance/walk conditions, sensory manipulations) is increased. However, it remains unclear whether these findings apply to individuals with differences in the development of the postural control system. Thus, we examined the influence of arm movement and task difficulty on balance performance in children, adolescents, and young adults.MethodsStatic, dynamic, and proactive balance performance were assessed in 40 children (11.5 ± 0.6 years), 30 adolescents (14.0 ± 1.1 years), and 41 young adults (24.7 ± 3.0 years) using the same standardized balance tests [i.e., one-legged stance (OLS) time with eyes opened/closed and/or on firm/foam ground, 3-m beam (width: 6, 4.5, or 3 cm) walking backward step number, Lower Quarter Y-Balance test (YBT-LQ) reach distance] with various difficulty levels under free vs. restricted arm movement conditions.ResultsIn all but one test, balance performance was significantly better during free compared to restricted arm movement. Arm by age interactions were only observed for the YBT-LQ and post hoc analyses revealed significantly greater performance differences between free and restricted arm movement, especially, in young adults. Arm by age by task difficulty interactions were found for the OLS and the 3-m beam walking backward test. Post hoc analyses showed significantly greater performance differences between free and restricted arm movement during high vs. low levels of task difficulty and this was more pronounced in children and adolescents.ConclusionsRegardless of age, static, dynamic, and proactive balance performance benefited from arm movements and this was especially noted for youth performing difficult balance tasks.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 64%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of Arm Movement and Task Difficulty on Balance Performance in Children, Adolescents, and Young Adults

Muehlbauer

Hill

Heise

et al. 2022

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In daily life and various sports activities, the human body must constantly change the support plane and constantly adjust the body posture to meet the needs of balance [ 45 , 46 ]. In SEBT, there are 5 directions (A front lateral, AM front medial, M medial, PM rear medial, and PL rear lateral) for analysis and comparison [ 47 ]. For the star bias test, SEBT-A, SEBT-AM, and SEBT-M were included in 5, 3, and 3 studies respectively.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review and meta-analysis of balance training in patients with chronic ankle instability

Guo,

Cheng,

Yang

et al. 2024

Syst Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Chronic ankle instability (CAI) is a common yet serious problem for elder patients. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of balance training for CAI, to provide evidence for the clinical treatment, and care of CAI patients. Methods Two investigators searched PubMed, EMBASE, Science Direct, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, and Weipu Databases up to May 20, 2023, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the effects of balance training for CAI. The mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs) was calculated for each outcome with a fixed or random effect model. Review Manager 5.3 software was used for meta-analysis. Results Nine RCTs involving 341 patients were included. Meta-analysis results showed that compared with blank controls, balanced training treatment of CAI could significantly improve the score of CAI [MD = 3.95, 95% CI (3.26, 4.64), P < 0.00001], SEBT-PM [MD = 4.94, 95% CI (1.88, 8.00), P = 0.002], SEBT-PL [MD = 5.19, 95% CI (1.57, 8.81), P = 0.005], and FAAM Sports [MD = 17.74, 95% CI (14.36, 21.11), P < 0.00001]. Compared with strength training, balance training treatment of CAI improved the score of CAIT [MD = 2.36, 95% CI (0.29, 4.44), P = 0.03], FAAM-ADL [MD = 4.06, 95% CI (1.30, 6.83), P = 0.004]. Conclusion The analysis outcomes indicate that balance training enhances daily activity capability, motor function, and dynamic balance to different extents. Additionally, when comparing the results of balance training and strength training, no significant difference was observed between the two methods in improving the dynamic stability of CAI patients. However, it is noteworthy that balance training exhibits a more pronounced impact on enhancing functional scale scores.

show abstract

Clinimetrics: The Star Excursion Balance Test

Pierobon

2024

Journal of Physiotherapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Star excursion balance test scores under different conditions: Effects of arms position and shoe-wear

Cited by 5 publications

References 27 publications

Effect of Arm Movement and Task Difficulty on Balance Performance in Children, Adolescents, and Young Adults

Effect of Arm Movement and Task Difficulty on Balance Performance in Children, Adolescents, and Young Adults

A systematic review and meta-analysis of balance training in patients with chronic ankle instability

Clinimetrics: The Star Excursion Balance Test

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About