Rizzato A, Paoli A, Marcolin Giuseppe
Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of Padova, Via Marzolo, 3, Padua, 35131, Italy.
BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2025 Jul 30;17(1):221. doi: 10.1186/s13102-025-01251-x.
The interpretation of evidence on the relationship between static and dynamic balance is complicated due to the several systems involved in postural control and the heterogeneity of the dynamic balance tasks used. The primary aim of this study was to explore the correlation between static and dynamic balance performance among healthy adults by means of the same center-of-pressure parameters. Given the importance of rapid reactive postural response in dynamic conditions, the secondary aim was to explore the relationship between dynamic balance performance and quadriceps strength and power.
Thirty-two healthy subjects (18 females; mean ± SD: age = 30.68 ± 13.31 years; body mass = 74.84 ± 15.18 kg; height = 1.75 ± 0.07 m) were assessed in static and dynamic balance conditions through a force plate that allowed computing the center of pressure trajectory. Static balance was assessed during an upright standing test and dynamic balance during an unstable board test. The same center-of-pressure parameters were calculated for both the two balance conditions: the 95th percentile ellipse area (Area95) and center-of-pressure mean velocity (MeanVelocity). The isometric quadriceps strength of the dominant leg was measured at 90 degrees of knee flexion with a load cell in steady and ballistic conditions. The maximal isometric strength and rate of force development were calculated.
Pearson's correlation showed non-statistically significant correlations between static and dynamic balance performance for both Area95 (R = 0.10; p = 0.07) and MeanVelocity (R = 0.001; p = 0.99). Across all parameters, the stepwise multiple linear regression analysis identified the RFD in the 100-150 ms window as the only determinant factor of the Area95 (p < 0.05, adjusted R² = 0.136) and MeanVelocity (p < 0.05, adjusted R² = 0.188) in the dynamic balance condition.
This study suggests a lack of correlation between static and dynamic balance performance in healthy adults, indicating that both may need to be considered in balance assessments for a more comprehensive evaluation.
由于姿势控制涉及多个系统以及所使用的动态平衡任务的异质性，关于静态和动态平衡之间关系的证据解释较为复杂。本研究的主要目的是通过相同的压力中心参数，探讨健康成年人静态和动态平衡表现之间的相关性。鉴于动态条件下快速反应性姿势反应的重要性，次要目的是探讨动态平衡表现与股四头肌力量和功率之间的关系。
32名健康受试者（18名女性；平均±标准差：年龄 = 30.68 ± 13.31岁；体重 = 74.84 ± 15.18 kg；身高 = 1.75 ± 0.07 m）通过允许计算压力中心轨迹的测力板在静态和动态平衡条件下进行评估。在直立站立测试中评估静态平衡，在不稳定板测试中评估动态平衡。为两种平衡条件计算相同的压力中心参数：第95百分位数椭圆面积（Area95）和压力中心平均速度（MeanVelocity）。使用测力传感器在稳定和弹道条件下于膝关节屈曲90度时测量优势腿的等长股四头肌力量。计算最大等长力量和力量发展速率。
Pearson相关性分析显示，对于Area95（R = 0.10；p = 0.07）和MeanVelocity（R = 0.001；p = 0.99），静态和动态平衡表现之间均无统计学显著相关性。在所有参数中，逐步多元线性回归分析确定在动态平衡条件下，100 - 150毫秒窗口内的力量发展速率是Area95（p < 0.05，调整后R² = 0.136）和MeanVelocity（p < 0.05，调整后R² = 0.188）的唯一决定因素。
本研究表明健康成年人的静态和动态平衡表现之间缺乏相关性，这表明在平衡评估中可能需要同时考虑两者，以进行更全面的评估。
