This study compared dynamic postural stability between subjects with and without recurrent low back pain (LBP) based on limb dominance and visual input. Participants performed single-leg stance trials with their dominant and non-dominant limbs under eyes-open and eyes-closed conditions. Center of pressure excursions and a dynamic postural stability index (DPSI) were analyzed. The LBP group demonstrated enhanced stability during dominant limb standing with eyes closed compared to their non-dominant limb. The DPSI indicated differences in postural integration between the groups under conditions of non-dominant limb standing with eyes closed, suggesting it is a sensitive outcome measure for assessing dynamic postural control in individuals with LBP.
This study compared dynamic postural stability between subjects with and without recurrent low back pain (LBP) based on limb dominance and visual input. Participants performed single-leg stance trials with their dominant and non-dominant limbs under eyes-open and eyes-closed conditions. Center of pressure excursions and a dynamic postural stability index (DPSI) were analyzed. The LBP group demonstrated enhanced stability during dominant limb standing with eyes closed compared to their non-dominant limb. The DPSI indicated differences in postural integration between the groups under conditions of non-dominant limb standing with eyes closed, suggesting it is a sensitive outcome measure for assessing dynamic postural control in individuals with LBP.
This study compared dynamic postural stability between subjects with and without recurrent low back pain (LBP) based on limb dominance and visual input. Participants performed single-leg stance trials with their dominant and non-dominant limbs under eyes-open and eyes-closed conditions. Center of pressure excursions and a dynamic postural stability index (DPSI) were analyzed. The LBP group demonstrated enhanced stability during dominant limb standing with eyes closed compared to their non-dominant limb. The DPSI indicated differences in postural integration between the groups under conditions of non-dominant limb standing with eyes closed, suggesting it is a sensitive outcome measure for assessing dynamic postural control in individuals with LBP.
Comparison of limb dominance and visual condition on dynamic postural stability
in subjects with and without recurrent low back pain
Jeff King and Riley Ballard
Advisor: Paul Sung Doctoral Program in Physical Therapy, Central Michigan University Background Results • Low back pain (LBP) is the most common musculoskeletal condition affecting postural stability • Postural stability is influenced by lower limb dominance and visual input
• Lower limb dominance and visual input are directly
related to postural deficits in subjects with low back pain
• There is lack of understanding of center of
pressure excursion and dynamic postural stability while considering visual conditions
• Center of pressure is the sum of all forces acting
between the foot and the ground • The excursions were analyzed by limb dominance and visual conditions between subjects with and without LBP
Purpose • There were no significant differences among
participants within the same group for all Methods conditions • To compare the COP excursion measurements and • No differences were found in COP between the the dynamic postural stability index (DPSI) based two groups for all conditions on limb dominance and visual input between subjects with and without recurrent LBP The groups did demonstrate a significant interaction • All subjects were determined right side dominant by preference of kicking ball with right foot. • Subjects completed random trials of dominant and non-dominant limbs in standing and eyes-closed or eyes-open with on vision and limb dominance for the DPSI (F = weight evenly distributed and requirement of 90 degrees of contralateral limb hip flexion and arms at side upon request 4.17, p = 0.04) during the following condition: • Non-dominant limb standing with eyes • DPSI analysis assessed fluctuations from zero along the axes of the AMTI force plate w closed Experimental Design
• Cross-sectional design Discussion
• Subjects recruited from Central Michigan University community through advertisement • The LBP group demonstrated enhanced postural • Participants: 26 subjects with recurrent LBP and 29 stability during dominant limb standing in the eyes without closed condition compared to their non-dominant limb • Required absence of sensory, motor, or psychological conditions • COP may not be a true record of body sway, but • Absence of any condition preventing single-leg rather a measure of the activity of the motor system stance when moving for a postural reaction
• Instead, the DPSI should be utilized to compare
postural integration while considering visual input and limb dominance in individuals with LBP
• The DPSI indicated a sensitive outcome assessment
for dynamic standing balance strategies, postural stability, and injury prevention in subjects with LBP
Oculopathy: Disproves the orthodox and theoretical bases upon which glasses are so freely prescribed, and puts forward natural remedial methods of treatment for what are sometimes termed incurable visual defects