Pavão Silvia Leticia, Ledebt Annick, Savelsbergh Geert J P, Rocha Nelci Adriana C F
Department of Physiotherapy, Neuropediatrics Section, Federal University of São Carlos, Brazil.
MOVE Research Institute Amsterdam, Department of Human Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Hum Mov Sci. 2017 Aug;54:137-143. doi: 10.1016/j.humov.2017.04.014. Epub 2017 May 6.
Postural control during quiet standing was examined in typical children (TD) and children with cerebral palsy (CP) level I and II of GMFCS. The immediate effect on postural control of functional taping on the thighs was analyzed. We evaluated 43 TD, 17 CP children level I, and 10 CP children level II. Participants were evaluated in two conditions (with and without taping). The trajectories of the center of pressure (COP) were analyzed by means of conventional posturography (sway amplitude, sway-path-length) and dynamic posturography (degree of twisting-and-turning, sway regularity). Both CP groups showed larger sway amplitude than the TD while only the CP level II showed more regular COP trajectories with less twisting-and-turning. Functional taping didn't affect sway amplitude or sway-path-length. TD children exhibited more twisting-and-turning with functional taping, whereas no effects on postural sway dynamics were observed in CP children. Functional taping doesn't result in immediate changes in quiet stance in CP children, whereas in TD it resulted in faster sway corrections. Children level II invest more attention in postural control than level I, and TD. While quiet standing was more automatized in children level I than in level II, both CP groups showed a less stable balance than TD.
对典型发育儿童(TD)以及GMFCS I级和II级的脑瘫(CP)儿童在安静站立时的姿势控制进行了检查。分析了大腿功能性贴扎对姿势控制的即时影响。我们评估了43名TD儿童、17名I级CP儿童和10名II级CP儿童。参与者在两种条件下(贴扎和不贴扎)接受评估。通过传统姿势描记法(摆动幅度、摆动路径长度)和动态姿势描记法(扭转程度、摆动规律性)分析压力中心(COP)的轨迹。两个CP组的摆动幅度均大于TD组,而只有II级CP组的COP轨迹更规则,扭转更少。功能性贴扎未影响摆动幅度或摆动路径长度。TD儿童在进行功能性贴扎时扭转更多,而CP儿童未观察到对姿势摆动动力学的影响。功能性贴扎不会使CP儿童的安静站立立即发生变化,而在TD儿童中,它会使摆动校正更快。II级儿童比I级儿童和TD儿童在姿势控制上投入更多注意力。虽然I级儿童的安静站立比II级儿童更自动化,但两个CP组的平衡稳定性均低于TD组。