Techniques and Methods for Testing the Postural Function in Healthy and Pathological Subjects

Abstract

The different techniques and methods employed as well as the different quantitative and qualitative variables measured in order to objectify postural control are often chosen without taking into account the population studied, the objective of the postural test, and the environmental conditions. For these reasons, the aim of this review was to present and justify the different testing techniques and methods with their different quantitative and qualitative variables to make it possible to precisely evaluate each sensory, central, and motor component of the postural function according to the experiment protocol under consideration. The main practical and technological methods and techniques used in evaluating postural control were explained and justified according to the experimental protocol defined. The main postural conditions (postural stance, visual condition, balance condition, and test duration) were also analyzed. Moreover, the mechanistic exploration of the postural function often requires implementing disturbing postural conditions by using motor disturbance (mechanical disturbance), sensory stimulation (sensory manipulation), and/or cognitive disturbance (cognitive task associated with maintaining postural balance) protocols. Each type of disturbance was tackled in order to facilitate understanding of subtle postural control mechanisms and the means to explore them.

Exercise interventions to improve balance for young people with intellectual disabilities: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

“…Mean speed displacement of the center of pressure, which corresponds to the cumulative distance over the sampling period, is used to assess the ability of individuals to control their balance and is considered one of the most sensitive and discriminant parameters of postural stability . Conversely, clinical tests or practical tests are commonly used for individuals with weak postural abilities (especially older people) when it seems impossible to perform qualitative analyses of postural control among young patients with pathologies . However, the subgroup analyses of the current meta‐analysis did not show any difference in the effects of exercise interventions according to the method used to measure balance of young people with intellectual disabilities.…”

“…one leg or double leg: feet apart, feet together, and semi‐tandem or full tandem), the visual inputs (eyes opened, eyes closed), and/or plantar cutaneous sensitiveness (hard floor, foam floor) . All of these conditions are used to observe young people's ability to maintain their postural stability and to characterize their postural strategies when the postural control is challenged, to quantify their balance deficits . Indeed, deficits in static balance control are related to deficits in the visual or sensorimotor systems which have been identified as a risk factor for falls .…”

A public data set of human balance evaluations

“…The stabilography evaluation was based on the most common practices used in research laboratories and the clinical environment (for a review see Duarte & Freitas, 2010; Paillard & Noe, 2015; Scoppa et al, 2013; Visser et al, 2008). …”

“…There is a large variety of tests to describe balance in humans (for a review see Duarte & Freitas, 2010; Paillard & Noe, 2015; Scoppa et al, 2013; Shumway-Cook & Woollacott, 2001; Visser et al, 2008; Yamamoto et al, 2015). The most common quantitative measurement to characterize body balance is the displacement of the center of pressure (COP); the point of application of the resultant vertical forces acting on the subject’s surface of support.…”

“…There are also numerous different protocols (which include the type of task the subject performs, instructions to the subject, duration of the task, type of instrument, etc.) for data collection, algorithms, and variables to process and characterize COP displacement (for a review on these issues see Duarte & Freitas, 2010; Paillard & Noe, 2015; Ruhe, Fejer & Walker, 2010; Scoppa et al, 2013; Visser et al, 2008; Yamamoto et al, 2015). Part of the lack of consensus and conflicting findings might be because of the typically large intra and inter-subject variability of the COP displacement data, and that some of the studies present low statistical power (typically because of a small sample size) (Ruhe, Fejer & Walker, 2010; Samson & Crowe, 1996).…”