Reliability of postural control measures in children and young adolescents

Barozzi, S.; Socci, M; Soi, Daniela; Berardino, Federica Di; Fabio, Giovanni; Forti, Stella; Gasbarre, A.; Brambilla, Daniele; Cesarani, Antonio

doi:10.1007/s00405-014-2930-9

Cited by 56 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 37 publications

(39 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results, therefore, support the assumption that force is continuously and considerably increasing during childhood (7), whereas postural control seems to mature predominantly between the age of 6 and 11 (6,29), and only marginally from 11 to 14 years (2). In line with this, an adult-like balance control can usually be seen around the age of 12-14 years (2,26). As mentioned previously, the postural control system undergoes a profound reorganization process starting at around the age of 6 (28).…”

Section: Postural Control and Explosive Strength Across Agessupporting

confidence: 67%

“…Young children rely predominantly on the visualvestibular system to maintain balance (19), while they start to change toward a more somatosensory-vestibular control at around the age of 6 (31). However, this transition to an adult-like balance control is not yet completed at the age of 12 (2,26). In addition, hierarchical lower-level systems of postural control (ie, reflexes) are already present at birth, whereas supraspinal systems mature later and do not show adult-like behavior until a child is about 10 years old (3).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Is Young Age a Limiting Factor When Training Balance? Effects of Child-Oriented Balance Training in Children and Adolescents

Wälchli

Ruffieux

Mouthon

et al. 2018

Pediatric Exercise Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Balance training (BT) studies in children reported conflicting results without evidence for improvements in children under the age of 8. The aim of this study therefore was to compare BT adaptations in children of different age groups to clarify whether young age prevents positive training outcomes. Methods: The effects of 5 weeks of child-oriented BT were tested in 77 (38 girls and 39 boys) participants of different age groups (6-7 y, 11-12 y, and 14-15 y) and compared with age-matched controls. Static and dynamic postural control, explosive strength, and jump height were assessed. Results: Across age groups, dynamic postural sway decreased (−18.7%; P = .012; η 2 p = .09) and explosive force increased (8.6%; P = .040; η 2 p = .06) in the intervention groups. Age-specific improvements were observed in dynamic postural sway, with greatest effects in the youngest group (−28.8%; P = .026; r = .61). Conclusion: In contrast to previous research using adult-oriented balance exercises, this study demonstrated for the first time that postural control can be trained from as early as the age of 6 years in children when using child-oriented BT. Therefore, the conception of the training seems to be essential in improving balance skills in young children.

show abstract

Section: Postural Control and Explosive Strength Across Agessupporting

confidence: 67%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Young Age a Limiting Factor When Training Balance? Effects of Child-Oriented Balance Training in Children and Adolescents

Wälchli

Ruffieux

Mouthon

et al. 2018

Pediatric Exercise Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, children and adolescents perform better on dynamic posturography tasks as they grow and develop. 38 However, even at baseline, the AIS group performed better than the Control Group on EPE but not MXE, which suggests they learn to improve the initial accuracy of their weight-shifts despite an aberrant center of gravity. Compared with baseline, the AIS subgroups had better performance on EPE by the second preoperative year.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Effect of Surgical Fusion on Volitional Weight-Shifting in Individuals With Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Study Design: Prospective. Objectives: The goals of this study were to (1) evaluate the differences in weightbearing symmetry between individuals with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) and typically developing controls; (2) observe the effect of posterior spinal fusion and instrumentation (PSFI) on volitional weight-shifting at 1 and 2 years postoperatively; and (3) evaluate whether lowest instrumented fusion level (ie, lowest instrumented vertebra [LIV]) in PSFI has an effect on volitional weight-shifting.NOT THE PUBLISHED VERSION; this is the author's final, peer-reviewed manuscript. The published version may be accessed by following the link in the citation at the bottom of the page.Spine Deformity, Vol 4, No. 6 (November 2016): pg. 432-438. DOI. This article is © Elsevier and permission has been granted for this version to appear in e-Publications@Marquette. Elsevier does not grant permission for this article to be further copied/distributed or hosted elsewhere without the express permission from Elsevier. 3Summary of Background Data: Previous studies have conflicting findings with regard to the effect of scoliosis on postural control tasks as well as the effect of surgery. They have also noted an inconsistent effect of PSFI at different LIVs, with more distal LIVs exhibiting greater reductions in postoperative range of motion. Methods: The study was designed with an AIS group of 41 patients (8 males and 33 females) with AIS who underwent PSFI, along with a Control Group of 24 age-matched typically developing participants (12 male and 12 female). Both groups performed postural control tasks (static balance and volitional weight-shifting), with the AIS group repeating the tasks at 1 and 2 years postoperatively. Results: At baseline, the AIS group showed increased weightbearing asymmetry than the Control Group (p = .01). The AIS group showed improvements in volitional weight-shifting at 2 years over baseline (p < .01). There was no effect of LIV on volitional weight-shifting by the second postoperative year. Conclusions: Individuals with AIS have greater weightbearing asymmetry but improved volitional weight-shifting over typically developing controls. PSFI improves volitional weight-shifting beyond preoperative baseline but does not differ significantly by LIV.

show abstract

“…Between tests an interval of 2 minutes was allowed. Considering the reported relatively high test-retest reliability of most common posturographic parameters for similar population samples in the tested conditions [34], and the possible effect of fatigue associated with this task [35] only one repetition for each condition was performed.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Time-to-Boundary Function to Study the Development of Upright Stance Control in Children

D’Anna

Schmid

Scorza

et al. 2017

TOBEJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:The development of postural control across the primary school time horizon is a complex process, which entails biomechanics modifications, the maturation of cognitive ability and sensorimotor organization, and the emergence of anticipatory behaviour. Postural stability in upright stance has been thus object of a multiplicity of studies to better characterize postural control in this age span, with a variety of methodological approaches. The analysis of the Time-to-Boundary function (TtB), which specifies the spatiotemporal proximity of the Centre of Pressure (CoP) to the stability boundaries in the regulation of posture in upright stance, is among the techniques used to better characterize postural stability in adults, but, as of now, it has not yet been introduced in developmental studies. The aim of this study was thus to apply this technique to evaluate the development of postural control in a sample population of primary school children.Methods:In this cross-sectional study, upright stance trials under eyes open and eyes closed were administered to 107 healthy children, divided into three age groups (41 for Seven Years' Group, Y7; 38 for Nine Years' Group, Y9; 28 for Eleven Years' Group, Y11). CoP data were recorded to calculate the Time-to-Boundary function (TtB), from which four spatio-temporal parameters were extracted: the mean value and the standard deviation of TtB minima (Mmin, Stdmin), and the mean value and the standard deviation of the temporal distance between two successive minima (Mdist, Stddist).Results:With eyes closed, Mmin and Stdmin significantly decreased and Mdist and Stddist increased for the Y7 group, at Y9 Mmin significantly decreased and Stddist increased, while no effect of vision resulted for Y11. Regarding age groups, Mmin was significantly higher for Y9 than Y7, and Stdmin for Y9 was higher than both Y7 and Y11; Mdist and Stddist resulted higher for Y11 than for Y9.Conclusion:From the combined results from the spatio-temporal TtB parameters, it is suggested that, at 9 years, children look more efficient in terms of exploring their limits of stability than at 7, and at 11 the observed TtB behaviour hints at the possibility that, at that age, they have almost completed the maturation of postural control in upright stance, also in terms of integration of the spatio-temporal information.

show abstract

Reliability of postural control measures in children and young adolescents

Cited by 56 publications

References 37 publications

Is Young Age a Limiting Factor When Training Balance? Effects of Child-Oriented Balance Training in Children and Adolescents

Is Young Age a Limiting Factor When Training Balance? Effects of Child-Oriented Balance Training in Children and Adolescents

Effect of Surgical Fusion on Volitional Weight-Shifting in Individuals With Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis

Time-to-Boundary Function to Study the Development of Upright Stance Control in Children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About