Functional reach: Does it really measure dynamic balance?

被引:84
|
作者
Wernick-Robinson, M
Krebs, DE
Giorgetti, MM
机构
[1] Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Biomot Lab, Boston, MA 02114 USA
[2] Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Phys Therapy Dept, Boston, MA 02114 USA
[3] Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Inst Hlth Profess Grad Program Phys Therapy, Boston, MA 02114 USA
来源
关键词
D O I
10.1016/S0003-9993(99)90136-3
中图分类号
R49 [康复医学];
学科分类号
100215 ;
摘要
Background: Functional reach (FR) is a new clinical measurement intended to assess dynamic balance. The purposes of this study were (1) to measure the mean FR distance in healthy elders compared with individuals with known balance impairments, (2) to analyze the extent to which FR measures dynamic balance, and (3) to describe movement strategies used during FR. Methods: Thirteen healthy elders and 15 individuals with vestibular hypofunction (VH) were tested during FR and free gait. Whole body kinematic and kinetic data including the center of gravity (CG) and center of pressure (CP) using 11 body segments and two force plates, respectively, were collected. Results: There was no difference in FR distance between healthy elders and individuals with VH. FR distance was not correlated to lateral stability measures, but was related to anterior-posterior postural control measures of FR (r = .69 to .84) in both groups. Although FR distance strongly correlated with maximum moment arm during FR in both groups, the correlations were not as strong when the subjects were then classified by movement strategy. The mean moment arm during FR was significantly less than that of free gait. Conclusions: These data suggest FR does not measure dynamic balance; healthy elders and balance-impaired individuals with vestibular dysfunction attained the same FR distance and did so without increasing the moment arm during or at the end of FR. Recording the strategy used during FR, however, may provide other valuable information necessary in addressing balance control. Clinical implications of assessing movement strategy are discussed. (C) 1999 by the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine and the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation.
引用
收藏
页码:262 / 269
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Does the courage measure really measure courage? A theoretical and empirical evaluation
    Howard, Matt C.
    Alipour, Kent K.
    JOURNAL OF POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, 2014, 9 (05): : 449 - 459
  • [22] The Functional Balance Ability Measure: A Measure of Balance Across the Spectrum of Functional Mobility in Persons Post-Stroke
    Cash, Jasmine J.
    Velozo, Craig A.
    Bowden, Mark G.
    Seamon, Bryant A.
    ARCHIVES OF REHABILITATION RESEARCH AND CLINICAL TRANSLATION, 2023, 5 (04)
  • [23] Hand reach star excursion balance test: An alternative test for dynamic postural control and functional mobility
    Eriksrud, Ola
    Federolf, Peter
    Anderson, Patrick
    Cabri, Jan
    PLOS ONE, 2018, 13 (05):
  • [24] DOES THE HOWARD-DOLMAN REALLY MEASURE STEREOACUITY
    LARSON, WL
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OPTOMETRY AND PHYSIOLOGICAL OPTICS, 1985, 62 (11): : 763 - 767
  • [25] Commentary: Failure to rescue: What does it really measure?
    Jacobs, Jeffrey P.
    Shahian, David M.
    Beaver, Thomas M.
    Pruitt, Eric Y.
    Edwards, Fred H.
    JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2023, 165 (01): : 146 - 148
  • [26] What Does the g-Index Really Measure?
    De Visscher, Alex
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2011, 62 (11): : 2290 - 2293
  • [27] WHAT DOES EYSENCK PSYCHOTICISM SCALE REALLY MEASURE
    HOWARTH, E
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY, 1986, 77 : 223 - 227
  • [28] A closer look at MLU: What does it really measure?
    Dethorne, LS
    Johnson, BW
    Loeb, JW
    CLINICAL LINGUISTICS & PHONETICS, 2005, 19 (08) : 635 - 648
  • [29] Measure once or twice - Does it really matter? Response
    Hilsenbeck, SG
    Von Hoff, DD
    JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 1999, 91 (20) : 1780 - 1781
  • [30] What Does the Narcissistic Personality Inventory Really Measure?
    Ackerman, Robert A.
    Witt, Edward A.
    Donnellan, M. Brent
    Trzesniewski, Kali H.
    Robins, Richard W.
    Kashy, Deborah A.
    ASSESSMENT, 2011, 18 (01) : 67 - 87