The effects of early stages of aging on postural sway: A multiple domain balance assessment using a force platform

Degani, Adriana M.; Leonard, Charles T.; Danna-Dos-Santos, Alessander

doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2017.08.029

Cited by 55 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To conclude, these female standard values are similar to Doerry et al [18], but clearly below the male standard values (frontal 11.67 mm/sagittal 17.67 mm) of Scharnweber et al [14] and lower than the values of the heterogenous subject groups of Degani et al [30] and Qiu et al [31]. Due to a variety of factors, such as impairment of proprioception or the locomotor system, postural control deteriorates with advancing age [32,33].…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 52%

“…The amplitude of the center of pressure is clearly higher than it was measured in the subjects of the present study. A reason for that could be a lower number [30,31] of subjects within the previous studies compared to the present one. Scharnweber et al [14] calculated a fluctuation of 11.67 mm in frontal and 17.67 mm in sagittal plane in male subjects.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 55%

“…These observations can be confirmed by Doerry et al [18] measuring 9.50 mm in the frontal plane and 13.00 mm in the sagittal plane. Degani et al [30] showed a fluctuation of 8.90 mm in frontal and 19.00 mm in sagittal direction, whereas Qiu et al [31] found a body sway of about 17 mm in sagittal and about 7 mm in frontal direction. The amplitude of the center of pressure is clearly higher than it was measured in the subjects of the present study.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Standard reference values of the postural control in healthy female adults aged between 31 and 40 years in Germany: an observational study

Ohlendorf

Pflaum

Wischnewski

et al. 2020

J Physiol Anthropol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background To detect deviations from a normal postural control, standard values can be helpful for comparison purposes. Since the postural control is influenced by gender and age, the aim of the present study was the collection of standard values for women between 31 and 40 years of age. Methods For the study, 106 female, subjectively healthy, German subjects aged between 31 and 40 years (35 ± 2.98 years) were measured using a pressure measuring platform. Results Their average BMI was 21.60 ± 4.65 kg/m2. The load distribution between left and right foot was almost evenly balanced with a median 51.46% load on the left [tolerance interval (TR) 37.02%/65.90%; confidence interval (CI) 50.06/52.85%] and 48.54% [TR 43.10/62.97%; CI 47.14/49.93%] on the right foot. The median forefoot load was 33.84% [TR 20.68/54.73%; CI 31.67/37.33%] and the rearfoot load was measured at 66.16% [TR 45.27/79.33%; CI 62.67/68.33%]. The median/mean body sway in the sagittal plane was measured 12 mm [TR 5.45/23.44 mm; CI 11.00/14.00 mm] and 8.17 mm in the frontal plane [TR 3.33/19.08 mm; CI 7.67/9.33 mm]. The median of the ellipse area is 0.72 cm2 [TR 0.15/3.69 cm2; CI 0.54/0.89°]. The ellipse width has a median of 0.66 cm [TR 0.30/1.77 cm; CI 0.61/0.78 cm] and the height of 0.33 cm [TR 0.13/0.71 cm; CI 0.30/0.37 cm]. The ellipse angle (sway, left forefoot to right rearfoot) has a mean of − 19.34° [TR − 59.21/− 0.44°; CI − 22.52/− 16.16°] and the ellipse angle sway from right forefoot to left rearfoot has a mean of 12.75° [TR 0.09/59.09°; CI 9.00/16.33°]. Conclusion The right-to-left ratio is balanced. The forefoot-to-rearfoot ratio is approximately 1:2. Also, the body sway can be classified with 12 and 8 mm as normal. The direction of fluctuation is either approx. 19° from the left forefoot to the right rearfoot or approx. 13° the opposite. Body weight, height, and BMI were comparable to the German average of women in a similar age group, so that the measured standard values are representative and might serve as baseline for the normal function of the balance system in order to support the diagnosis of possible dysfunctions in postural control.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 52%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 55%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Standard reference values of the postural control in healthy female adults aged between 31 and 40 years in Germany: an observational study

Ohlendorf

Pflaum

Wischnewski

et al. 2020

J Physiol Anthropol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An optimal load of a model subject is distributed as follows: 16.67% of total weight on fifth metatarsal head, 33.33% of total weight on first metatarsal head, and 50% of total weight on heel [36,38]. The measured body center of pressure (CoP) was then examined in contrast with the theoretical one [39,40].…”

Section: Plantar Pressure and Stabilometric Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Static Plantar Pressure, Stabilometry, Vitamin D and Bone Mineral Density in Female Adolescents with Moderate Idiopathic Scoliosis

Căţan

Cerbu

Amăricăi

et al. 2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(1) Background: Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) can be associated with vitamin D deficiency and osteopenia. Plantar pressure and stabilometry offer important information about posture. The objectives of our study were to compare static plantar pressure and stabilometric parameters, serum 25-OH-vitamin D3 and calcium levels, and bone mineral densitometry expressed as z-score in patients with moderate AIS and healthy subjects. (2) Methods: 32 female adolescents (idiopathic S shaped moderate scoliosis, main lumbar curve) and 32 gender and age-matched controls performed: static plantar pressure, stabilometry, serum 25-OH-vitamin D3 and calcium levels, and dual X-ray absorptiometry scans of the spine. (3) Results: In scoliosis patients, significant differences were recorded between right and left foot for total foot, first and fifth metatarsal, and heel loadings. Stabilometry showed a poorer postural control when compared to healthy subjects (p < 0.001). Patients had significantly lower vitamin D, calcium levels, and z-scores. Lumbar Cobb angle was significantly correlated with the z-score (r = −0.39, p = 0.02), with right foot fifth metatarsal load (r = −0.35, p = 0.04), center of pressure CoPx (r = −0.42, p = 0.01), CoP displacement (r = 0.35, p = 0.04) and 90% confidence ellipse area (r = −0.38, p = 0.03). (4) Conclusions: In our study including female adolescents with idiopathic S shaped moderate scoliosis, plantar pressure and stabilometric parameters were influenced by the main scoliotic curve.

show abstract

“…The measured body centre of pressure (CoP) was compared with the theoretical one [21,22]. Body centre of pressure deviation from theoretical reference was measured on anterior-posterior (CoP Y ) and latero-lateral (CoP X ) axes [17, 21,23].…”

Section: Assessmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do different dental conditions influence the static plantar pressure and stabilometry in young adults?

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPosture is influenced by many factors and dental occlusion seems to have its role on postural stabilization. Our rationale to perform the study was to find out if there are differences of static plantar pressure and stabilometric parameters depending on different dental conditions. MethodsThe observational study consisted in plantar pressure assessment and stabilometric analysis of 95 right-handed healthy volunteer subjects (mean age 22.94 ± 2.52 years) by using the PoData system. Each subject followed four measurements with open eyes: mandibular postural position, maximum intercuspation, biting on cotton rolls and maximum mouth opening. Plantar pressure was recorded on 1 st and 5 th metatarsal heads and heel, and was expressed as percentage of weight distribution on each foot. The recorded centre of pressure (CoP) parameters were: CoP path length, 90%confidence ellipse area and maximum CoP speed. Statistical analysis used repeated-measures ANOVA with Bonferroni posthoc analysis and Friedman test. OPEN ACCESS Citation: Amaricai E, Onofrei RR, Suciu O, Marcauteanu C, Stoica ET, Negruțiu ML, et al. (2020) Do different dental conditions influence the static plantar pressure and stabilometry in young adults? PLoS ONE 15(2): e0228816. https://doi.

show abstract

The effects of early stages of aging on postural sway: A multiple domain balance assessment using a force platform

Cited by 55 publications

References 37 publications

Standard reference values of the postural control in healthy female adults aged between 31 and 40 years in Germany: an observational study

Standard reference values of the postural control in healthy female adults aged between 31 and 40 years in Germany: an observational study

Assessment of Static Plantar Pressure, Stabilometry, Vitamin D and Bone Mineral Density in Female Adolescents with Moderate Idiopathic Scoliosis

Do different dental conditions influence the static plantar pressure and stabilometry in young adults?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About