OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relationship between anthropometric characteristics and body-balancing movements when standing on 2 legs with eyes open and eyes closed. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: A university physiatry laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred randomly selected subjects (50 men, 50 women; age range, 31-80y). INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Anthropomorphic: body height, weight, lower-extremity distances, foot lengths, and widest widths of the forefeet and heels. Body movements: 2-legged stance with eyes open and eyes closed, measured with the MacReflex Motion Capture System and calculated as maximal and total movements in 3 dimensions. The relation between the measured anthropometric characteristics and body-balancing movements was calculated by using regression analysis. RESULTS: In the eyes-open condition, maximal lateral knee movement was related to body height and foot length (R(2)=.065, P<.05). Both anteroposterior (AP) head movement (R(2)=.068, P<.05) and AP navel movement (R(2)=.083, P<.05) were related to heel width. AP knee movement was related to foot length and heel width (R(2)=.089, P<.05). Body mass index was related to AP ankle movement (R(2)=.074, P<.05) and to vertical ankle movement (R(2)=.063, P<.05). In the eyes-closed condition, body mass index was related to the vertical navel movement (R(2)=.059, P<.05) and body height to AP knee movement (R(2)=.041, P<.05). CONCLUSION: The levels of significance are not high but warrant attention. It seems that there was no single anthropometric factor that explained the variations in body-balancing movements during standing. Copyright 2003 by the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine and the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relationship between anthropometric characteristics and body-balancing movements when standing on 2 legs with eyes open and eyes closed. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: A university physiatry laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred randomly selected subjects (50 men, 50 women; age range, 31-80y). INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Anthropomorphic: body height, weight, lower-extremity distances, foot lengths, and widest widths of the forefeet and heels. Body movements: 2-legged stance with eyes open and eyes closed, measured with the MacReflex Motion Capture System and calculated as maximal and total movements in 3 dimensions. The relation between the measured anthropometric characteristics and body-balancing movements was calculated by using regression analysis. RESULTS: In the eyes-open condition, maximal lateral knee movement was related to body height and foot length (R(2)=.065, P<.05). Both anteroposterior (AP) head movement (R(2)=.068, P<.05) and AP navel movement (R(2)=.083, P<.05) were related to heel width. AP knee movement was related to foot length and heel width (R(2)=.089, P<.05). Body mass index was related to AP ankle movement (R(2)=.074, P<.05) and to vertical ankle movement (R(2)=.063, P<.05). In the eyes-closed condition, body mass index was related to the vertical navel movement (R(2)=.059, P<.05) and body height to AP knee movement (R(2)=.041, P<.05). CONCLUSION: The levels of significance are not high but warrant attention. It seems that there was no single anthropometric factor that explained the variations in body-balancing movements during standing. Copyright 2003 by the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine and the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Authors: Júlia Maria D'Andréa Greve; Mutlu Cuğ; Deniz Dülgeroğlu; Guilherme Carlos Brech; Angelica Castilho Alonso Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2013-01-16 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Angélica C Alonso; Luis Mochizuki; Natália Mariana Silva Luna; Sérgio Ayama; Alexandra Carolina Canonica; Júlia M D A Greve Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2015-10-11 Impact factor: 3.411