Search

The purpose of this study was to determine whether the UPST was objectived by stabilometric parameters in both bipodal and unipodal stations. Twenty-six women, 15 men, average age 34 ± 6.9 years, are divided into 2 groups by an expert practitioner according to the results of the UPST. They were then evaluated in bipodal stance on force platform (Médicapteurs©, Fusyo®, France) for 31.6 sec at 40 Hz, under 4 conditions: – open eyes; – closed eyes; – open eyes with foam and; – closed eyes with foam (Capitoner® 8sh 2 mm). Subjects were recorded in unipodal situation for 5 sec at 40 Hz on the left and right feet, eyes open and eyes closed. All registrations were randomized and volunteers with a dominant left foot (2) or a UPST dysfunction on the left were excluded (4). Data analysis was performed by two MANOVA for each experimental time. Subjects with bilateral instability to the UPST showed a significantly larger surface area of the Centre of Pressure in the bipodal situation with eyes closed (F (2.32) = 4.48; P = 0.02 (η2 = 0.22)) and in unipedal situation with eyes open, only on the left foot (F (2.32) = 5.7; P = 0.008 (η2 = 0.26)) compared to volunteers without pelvic instabilities. The subjects with right dysfunctions to the UPST showed no significant difference in stabilometric parameters compared to the control population. Subjects with bilateral pelvic instability have poorer postural stability in both bipodal and unipedal stance while isolated right pelvic instability cannot be characterized by force platform exams. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study experiments the incidence of a 2 mm thin median bar (BM®) and truncated median bar (BMt®) plantar relief in bilateral pelvic instabilities, considering the effect of the presence or not of plantar afferences inefficiency on unipedal stabilometric performance [1]. Eleven subjects with bilateral pelvic instability at the unipedal pelvic stability test (TSPU) [1] and with a right dominant foot were evaluated. Randomized measurements were performed in bipodal stance on force platform (Médicapteurs©, Fusyo®, France) for 31.6 sec at 40 Hz and then in unipedal stance for 5 sec at 40 Hz on each foot, eyes open and eyes closed under three conditions: – Control; – BM® – BMt®. Repeated and factorial variance analyses were then carried out. The population was divided into two groups according to their Plantar Quotient (PQ) greater or less than 100 determined by the bipodal registrations [2]. Seven subjects showed a QP greater than 100 and 4 subjects a QP less than 100. The BM® and BMt® stimuli enhanced the Surface of the Centre of Pressure (CoP) on the right foot with eyes closed. Taking into account the QP, subjects with a QP greater than 100 were enhanced on the surface of the CoP with BMt® only. In this condition, both median bars (BM® and BMt®) enhanced the subjects if their QP was less than 100. This study on bilateral pelvic instabilities with thin plantar stimuli confirms their therapeutic interest in these dysfunctions of postural control and illustrates fundamental interest of two notions: – foot dominance and; – efficiency or inefficiency of plantar afferences. These results require further research that considers these intra and inter individual differences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]