Introduction Wobble Boards (WB) are often used in different clinical settings to improve neuromuscular function and reduce injury risk (Williams and Bentman, 2014). Although their effectiveness is well known, nowadays only few devices are able to quantify WB balance performances and relatively few studies investigated their reliability (Hamer et al, 1992). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine the intrasession reliability of a computerized WB. Methods After signing an informed consent, 28 (15 females, 13 males) college (major: sport sciences) students (age: 25.5±3.3years; weight: 64.0±12.7kg; height: 167.4±10.3cm) were involved in the study. Balance performance was assessed on a computerized WB (diameter=40cm) as the time spent in the target zone (TZ, diameter=6.3cm) displayed on a screen. Participants were asked to stand barefoot on the WB with a comfortable double leg stance, keeping their hands on their hip. The WB Balance test was administered during 2 testing sessions (Familiarization session-FS and Test session-TS), organized with a 1- week interval in between. Each session consisted of a 3-min free practice followed by three 30-s trials (1-min sitting recovery in between) of two conditions: 1) with Visual Biofeedback (VBF), showing real time performance; and 2) without Visual Biofeedback (NVBF), looking at a black wall. Consistency of the WB scores across the three trials was determined using intra-class correlation coefficients. Results For VBF, both FS and TS showed ICC=0.68 (FS: 95% CI: 0.50-0.82; TS: 95% CI: 0.49-0.82). For NVBF, FS showed ICC=0.41 (95% CI: 0.18-0.64), whereas the relative picture for TS was ICC=0.40 (95% CI: 0.17-0.63). Discussion Findings confirm that WB could be a useful, portable, and relatively affordable equipment for the evaluation of balance performances in different clinical settings, especially when a visual feedback is provided. However, the level of expertise of the studied sample limits the generalizability of the present results, thus different population needs further investigation. Reference Williams J and Bentman S, (2014). Phys Ther Sport, 15(3): 143-147 Hamer PW et al, (1992). Aust J Physiother, 38(2): 85-92

Assessing Balance Performance: Intrasession Reliability of a Wobble Board

FUSCO, Andrea;GIANCOTTI, Giuseppe Francesco;CAPELLI, Giovanni;CORTIS, Cristina
2016

Abstract

Introduction Wobble Boards (WB) are often used in different clinical settings to improve neuromuscular function and reduce injury risk (Williams and Bentman, 2014). Although their effectiveness is well known, nowadays only few devices are able to quantify WB balance performances and relatively few studies investigated their reliability (Hamer et al, 1992). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine the intrasession reliability of a computerized WB. Methods After signing an informed consent, 28 (15 females, 13 males) college (major: sport sciences) students (age: 25.5±3.3years; weight: 64.0±12.7kg; height: 167.4±10.3cm) were involved in the study. Balance performance was assessed on a computerized WB (diameter=40cm) as the time spent in the target zone (TZ, diameter=6.3cm) displayed on a screen. Participants were asked to stand barefoot on the WB with a comfortable double leg stance, keeping their hands on their hip. The WB Balance test was administered during 2 testing sessions (Familiarization session-FS and Test session-TS), organized with a 1- week interval in between. Each session consisted of a 3-min free practice followed by three 30-s trials (1-min sitting recovery in between) of two conditions: 1) with Visual Biofeedback (VBF), showing real time performance; and 2) without Visual Biofeedback (NVBF), looking at a black wall. Consistency of the WB scores across the three trials was determined using intra-class correlation coefficients. Results For VBF, both FS and TS showed ICC=0.68 (FS: 95% CI: 0.50-0.82; TS: 95% CI: 0.49-0.82). For NVBF, FS showed ICC=0.41 (95% CI: 0.18-0.64), whereas the relative picture for TS was ICC=0.40 (95% CI: 0.17-0.63). Discussion Findings confirm that WB could be a useful, portable, and relatively affordable equipment for the evaluation of balance performances in different clinical settings, especially when a visual feedback is provided. However, the level of expertise of the studied sample limits the generalizability of the present results, thus different population needs further investigation. Reference Williams J and Bentman S, (2014). Phys Ther Sport, 15(3): 143-147 Hamer PW et al, (1992). Aust J Physiother, 38(2): 85-92
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11580/56919
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
social impact