Differences in Responses on the Modified Clinical Test of Sensory Interaction and Balance on Medium Firm and Medium Density Foam in Healthy Controls and Patients with Vestibular Disorders.

Biomedicine Hub Pub Date : 2020-04-14 eCollection Date: 2020-01-01 DOI:10.1159/000507180
Helen S Cohen, Haleh Sangi-Haghpeykar
{"title":"Differences in Responses on the Modified Clinical Test of Sensory Interaction and Balance on Medium Firm and Medium Density Foam in Healthy Controls and Patients with Vestibular Disorders.","authors":"Helen S Cohen,&nbsp;Haleh Sangi-Haghpeykar","doi":"10.1159/000507180","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To determine whether foam density affects modified Romberg balance test performance.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Controls and patients with vestibular disorders performed Romberg tests on medium and medium firm foam, with their eyes closed and the head still and moving in yaw and pitch. The trial duration and number of head movements were measured.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Subjects aged >60 years performed longer and with more head movements on medium firm foam than on medium foam. Older controls did not differ between medium firm and medium foam. Older patients had higher scores on head-still and head-yaw trials on medium firm foam versus medium foam but pitch trials did not differ. Females, controls, and patients had longer trial durations and more head movements on medium firm foam than on medium density foam; male controls did not differ by foam density. Male patients differed in yaw trials.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Foam density affects scores. Clinical decision-making may be adversely affected if the clinician uses foam of a density that is not the same as that of the foam that was used in the studies that developed descriptive statistics, sensitivity, and specificity.</p>","PeriodicalId":9075,"journal":{"name":"Biomedicine Hub","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000507180","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biomedicine Hub","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000507180","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Purpose: To determine whether foam density affects modified Romberg balance test performance.

Materials and methods: Controls and patients with vestibular disorders performed Romberg tests on medium and medium firm foam, with their eyes closed and the head still and moving in yaw and pitch. The trial duration and number of head movements were measured.

Results: Subjects aged >60 years performed longer and with more head movements on medium firm foam than on medium foam. Older controls did not differ between medium firm and medium foam. Older patients had higher scores on head-still and head-yaw trials on medium firm foam versus medium foam but pitch trials did not differ. Females, controls, and patients had longer trial durations and more head movements on medium firm foam than on medium density foam; male controls did not differ by foam density. Male patients differed in yaw trials.

Conclusion: Foam density affects scores. Clinical decision-making may be adversely affected if the clinician uses foam of a density that is not the same as that of the foam that was used in the studies that developed descriptive statistics, sensitivity, and specificity.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
健康对照者与前庭功能障碍患者对中硬、中密度泡沫感觉相互作用和平衡修正临床测试反应的差异
目的:确定泡沫密度是否影响修正Romberg平衡试验性能。材料和方法:对照组和前庭功能障碍患者闭上眼睛,头部静止、偏航和俯仰运动,对中、中硬泡沫进行Romberg试验。测量试验持续时间和头部运动次数。结果:年龄>60岁的受试者在使用中硬泡沫时比使用中硬泡沫时表现更长,头部运动更多。较老的对照组在中等硬度和中等泡沫之间没有差异。老年患者在中硬泡沫和中硬泡沫的头部静止和头部偏航试验中得分较高,但俯仰试验没有差异。与使用中密度泡沫相比,使用中等硬度泡沫的女性、对照组和患者的试验持续时间更长,头部运动更多;男性控制组的泡沫密度没有差异。男性患者在偏航试验中有所不同。结论:泡沫密度影响评分。如果临床医生使用的泡沫密度与开发描述性统计、敏感性和特异性的研究中使用的泡沫密度不同,则可能对临床决策产生不利影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Folate Receptor Beta Signaling in the Regulation of Macrophage Antimicrobial Immune Response: A Scoping Review Estimation of the Variance Components in TP53 mRNA Expression in the Rat Lens after in vivo Exposure to Ultraviolet Radiation B. Physical Activity among Primary Health Care Physicians and Its Impact on Counseling Practices. A Potential Off-Target Effect of the Wnt/β-Catenin Inhibitor KYA1797K: PD-L1 Binding and Checkpoint Inhibition. Enhanced Depth of Focus Intraocular Lenses: Through Focus Evaluation of Wavefront-Shaping versus Diffractive Optics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1