轻度和中重度头后仰患者的感觉组织和姿势控制策略:比较研究。

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Nahid Pirayeh, Zahra Heidary, Mohammad Mehravar, Mohammad Jafar Shaterzadeh Yazdi, Neda Mostafaee
{"title":"轻度和中重度头后仰患者的感觉组织和姿势控制策略:比较研究。","authors":"Nahid Pirayeh, Zahra Heidary, Mohammad Mehravar, Mohammad Jafar Shaterzadeh Yazdi, Neda Mostafaee","doi":"10.1016/j.jmpt.2024.02.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to compare sensory organization test and postural control strategies between individuals with mild and moderate-to-severe forward head posture (FHP).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A sensory organization test (SOT) was performed in 6 conditions using computerized dynamic posturography, to assess postural control. Equilibrium scores representing overall balance, strategy analysis to assess ankle vs hip strategy dominance, and sensory analysis (Somatosensory, visual, vestibular, visual preference ratio) as an indicator of the use of sensory systems were obtained.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our results revealed a significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of equilibrium score (P < .05) and strategy scores (P < .05) in conditions of 4 to 6 of the SOT. The results of sensory analysis of SOT showed visual and vestibular ratios were significantly different between the 2 study groups (P < .05), but somatosensory and visual preference ratios were not significantly different between these 2 groups (P > .05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Individuals with moderate-to-severe FHP swayed more in comparison with mild FHP ones in conditions with the Sway-referenced platform of the SOT. They tended to rely on the hip strategy more than the ankle strategy excessively when sensory difficulty increased. Overall, it can be concluded that individuals with moderate-to-severe FHP are more likely to have postural deficits.</p>","PeriodicalId":16132,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sensory Organization and Postural Control Strategies in Individuals With Mild and Moderate-to-Severe Forward Head Posture: A Comparative Study.\",\"authors\":\"Nahid Pirayeh, Zahra Heidary, Mohammad Mehravar, Mohammad Jafar Shaterzadeh Yazdi, Neda Mostafaee\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jmpt.2024.02.004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to compare sensory organization test and postural control strategies between individuals with mild and moderate-to-severe forward head posture (FHP).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A sensory organization test (SOT) was performed in 6 conditions using computerized dynamic posturography, to assess postural control. Equilibrium scores representing overall balance, strategy analysis to assess ankle vs hip strategy dominance, and sensory analysis (Somatosensory, visual, vestibular, visual preference ratio) as an indicator of the use of sensory systems were obtained.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our results revealed a significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of equilibrium score (P < .05) and strategy scores (P < .05) in conditions of 4 to 6 of the SOT. The results of sensory analysis of SOT showed visual and vestibular ratios were significantly different between the 2 study groups (P < .05), but somatosensory and visual preference ratios were not significantly different between these 2 groups (P > .05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Individuals with moderate-to-severe FHP swayed more in comparison with mild FHP ones in conditions with the Sway-referenced platform of the SOT. They tended to rely on the hip strategy more than the ankle strategy excessively when sensory difficulty increased. Overall, it can be concluded that individuals with moderate-to-severe FHP are more likely to have postural deficits.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16132,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmpt.2024.02.004\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/3/26 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmpt.2024.02.004","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究目的本研究旨在比较轻度和中重度前头姿势(FHP)患者的感觉组织测试和姿势控制策略:方法:在 6 种情况下使用计算机化动态体位测量法进行感觉组织测试 (SOT),以评估姿势控制能力。结果:我们的研究结果表明,在 6 种情况下,踝关节与髋关节的策略优势明显不同:结果表明,在 SOT 的 4 至 6 项条件中,两组在平衡得分(P < .05)和策略得分(P < .05)方面存在显著差异。SOT的感官分析结果显示,视觉和前庭比率在两个研究组之间存在显著差异(P < .05),但体感和视觉偏好比率在两个研究组之间没有显著差异(P > .05):结论:与轻度 FHP 患者相比,中重度 FHP 患者在 SOT 的摇摆参照平台条件下摇摆得更厉害。当感觉困难程度增加时,他们倾向于过度依赖髋部策略,而不是踝部策略。总之,可以得出结论,中重度 FHP 患者更容易出现姿势障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Sensory Organization and Postural Control Strategies in Individuals With Mild and Moderate-to-Severe Forward Head Posture: A Comparative Study.

Objective: This study aimed to compare sensory organization test and postural control strategies between individuals with mild and moderate-to-severe forward head posture (FHP).

Methods: A sensory organization test (SOT) was performed in 6 conditions using computerized dynamic posturography, to assess postural control. Equilibrium scores representing overall balance, strategy analysis to assess ankle vs hip strategy dominance, and sensory analysis (Somatosensory, visual, vestibular, visual preference ratio) as an indicator of the use of sensory systems were obtained.

Results: Our results revealed a significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of equilibrium score (P < .05) and strategy scores (P < .05) in conditions of 4 to 6 of the SOT. The results of sensory analysis of SOT showed visual and vestibular ratios were significantly different between the 2 study groups (P < .05), but somatosensory and visual preference ratios were not significantly different between these 2 groups (P > .05).

Conclusion: Individuals with moderate-to-severe FHP swayed more in comparison with mild FHP ones in conditions with the Sway-referenced platform of the SOT. They tended to rely on the hip strategy more than the ankle strategy excessively when sensory difficulty increased. Overall, it can be concluded that individuals with moderate-to-severe FHP are more likely to have postural deficits.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
7.70%
发文量
63
审稿时长
29 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics (JMPT) is an international and interdisciplinary journal dedicated to the advancement of conservative health care principles and practices. The JMPT is the premier biomedical publication in the chiropractic profession and publishes peer reviewed, research articles and the Journal''s editorial board includes leading researchers from around the world. The Journal publishes original primary research and review articles of the highest quality in relevant topic areas. The JMPT addresses practitioners and researchers needs by adding to their clinical and basic science knowledge and by informing them about relevant issues that influence health care practices.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信