Download Free PDF View PDF
The Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development
Download Free PDF View PDF
Download Free PDF View PDF
Reliability is a population-specific property, but to the authors’ knowledge there has been no study to determine the test–retest reliability of the postural stability measures such as center of pressure (COP) measures in the population of patients with musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs), while their clinical applications have been presented in literature. So, 33 patients with low back pain (LBP), anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury and functional ankle instability (FAI) randomly completed postural measurements with three levels of difficulty (rigid surface-eyes open, rigid surface-eyes closed, and foam surface-eyes closed) in two sessions. COP data were used to calculate standard deviation of amplitude, standard deviation of velocity, phase plane portrait, mean total velocity and area (95% confidence ellipse). Relative reliability of these measures was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and absolute reliability using standard error of measurement (SEM) and coefficient of variation (CV). Also, minimal metrically detectable change (MMDC) was calculated to quantify intervention effects. Among different COP parameters, mean total velocity in all conditions of postural difficulty showed high to very high reliability, with ICC range of 0.74–0.91, SEM range of 0.09–0.40 cm/s, CV range of 5.31–8.29% and MMDC range of 0.19–0.79 cm/s. Phase plane portrait in anteroposterior–mediolateral (AP–ML) and ML direction were other best parameters with respect to the level of reliability. Mean total velocity and phase plane portrait parameters are suggested as good candidates to use for quantification and assessment of balance performance and identifying those with MSDs.
Download Free PDF View PDF
Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology
Download Free PDF View PDF
Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Download Free PDF View PDF
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
This study was designed to assess how the results obtained for three different posturographic platforms agreed with each other in an assessment of static postural stability. The study included 111 young healthy participants. A measurement of postural stability was made for each participant, with their eyes open and then closed, on each platform in a random order. The Romberg ratio, path length, and center of pressure (COP) area were analyzed. For all measures, significant differences (p < 0.05) were observed among the three force plates. The highest Spearman's rank correlation was observed between Alfa vs. CQStab2P (0.20 to 0.38), and the lowest between Alfa vs. AccuGait (−0.19 to 0.09). Similar results were obtained for the concordance correlation coefficient (0.10 to 0.22 for Alfa vs. CQStab2P and −0.6 to 0.02 for Alfa vs. AccuGait). Bland–Altman analysis for values standardized (z-scores) against AccuGait indicated a low level of agreement between compared platforms, with .
Download Free PDF View PDF
The Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development
