自主姿势控制能力评估的研究进展

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-9771.2019.04.010

《中国康复理论与实践》 ›› 2019, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (4): 422-429.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-9771.2019.04.010

自主姿势控制能力评估的研究进展

陈正权¹, 陆耀飞¹, 韩甲¹, 王雪强²

1.上海体育学院运动科学学院；上海市200438
2.上海体育学院运动医学康复中心，上海市200438

收稿日期:2018-10-10 修回日期:2018-10-31 出版日期:2019-04-20 发布日期:2019-04-24
通讯作者: 陆耀飞，E-mail: luyaofei@outlook.com
作者简介:陈正权(1994-)，男，汉族，江苏徐州市人，硕士研究生，主要研究方向：姿势控制及老年康复。
基金资助:
1.上海体育学院境外访学项目(No. stfx20180121)；2.上海市曙光计划(No. 16SG45)；3.国家自然科学基金面上项目(No. 31870936)；4.教育部人文社科规划基金(No. 18YJA0006)

Advance in Voluntary Postural Control Assessment (review)

CHEN Zheng-quan¹, LU Yao-fei¹, HAN Jia¹, WANG Xue-qiang²

1.School of Kinesiology,Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai 200438, China
2.School of Kinesiology, Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai 200438, China

Received:2018-10-10 Revised:2018-10-31 Published:2019-04-20 Online:2019-04-24
Contact: LU Yao-fei, E-mail: luyaofei@outlook.com
Supported by:
Shanghai University Sport Overseas Visiting Program (No. stfx20180121), Shanghai Shuguang Plan (No. 16SG45), National Natural Science Foundation of China (General) (No. 31870936) and Ministry of Education Humanities and Social Science Project (No. 18YJA0006)

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 姿势控制对维持姿势稳定和提高动作效率具有至关重要的作用。姿势控制包含非自主成分和自主成分，而自主姿势控制能力的研究尚未形成统一的模式。本文从自主姿势控制能力研究框架入手，回顾三种常见的自主姿势控制测试方法。其中，计时起立-行走测试具有测试设备简单、测试场地灵活和面向人群广的特点，可反映框架内的多种能力；平衡评估系统测试包含三个版本，各个版本均具有较高的结构效度，在自主姿势评估上各有特点；统一平衡量表的测试项目也覆盖框架的多个方面，且该量表存在质量控制方法。各测试方法的选用取决于研究目的、场合和时间，也可选择多种测试方法联合应用。

关键词: 姿势控制, 姿势不稳, 自主姿势控制, 评估, 综述

Abstract: Postural control plays a crucial role in maintaining posture stability and improving performance efficiency. It involves involuntary and voluntary components. There is not a unified model for assessment of voluntary postural control. Based on the research framework of voluntary postural control, this paper reviewed three common voluntary postural control assessment tools (Timed "Up and Go" Test, Balance Evaluation System Test and Unified Balance Scale). The Timed “Up and Go” Test contains various capabilities which are recommended by the framework. There are few restrictions on the facilities and test circumstance, and it can be used in different populations. Balance Evaluation System Test consists of three different versions; each of them has high structure validity and shows different characteristics in the evaluation of voluntary postural control. The items of Unified Balance Scale also cover most of capabilities provided by the framework, and there are quality control methods in the scale. These tools would be selected according to purpose, occasion and time of study, or used in combination.

Key words: postural control, postural instability, voluntary postural control, assessment, review

中图分类号:

R496

陈正权, 陆耀飞, 韩甲, 王雪强. 自主姿势控制能力评估的研究进展[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2019, 25(4): 422-429.

CHEN Zheng-quan, LU Yao-fei, HAN Jia, WANG Xue-qiang. Advance in Voluntary Postural Control Assessment (review)[J]. 《Chinese Journal of Rehabilitation Theory and Practice》, 2019, 25(4): 422-429.

参考文献

[1] Shumway-CookA, WoollacottM. Attentional demands and postural control: The effect of sensory context [J]. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci, 2000, 55(1): M10-M16.
[2] MouelC L, BretteR. Mobility as the purpose of postural control [J]. Front Comput Neurosci, 2017, 11(67): 1-11.
[3] TuckerM G, KavanaghJ J, MorrisonS, et al. Voluntary sway and rapid orthogonal transitions of voluntary sway in young adults, and low and high fall-risk older adults [J]. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon), 2009, 24(8): 597-605.
[4] ProchazkaA, ClaracF, LoebG E, et al. What do reflex and voluntary mean? Modern views on an ancient debate [J]. Exp Brain Res, 2000, 130(4): 417-432.
[5] HorakF B. Postural orientation and equilibrium: what do we need to know about neural control of balance to prevent falls? [J]. Age Ageing, 2006, 35(Suppl 2): ii7-ii11.
[6] SibleyK M, BeauchampM K, van OoteghemK, et al. Using the systems framework for postural control to analyze the components of balance evaluated in standardized balance measures: a scoping review [J]. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 2015, 96(1): 122-132.e29.
[7] PodsiadloD, RichardsonS. The Timed “Up & Go”: a test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons [J]. J Am Geriatr Soc, 1991, 39(2): 142-148.
[8] AnsaiJ H, AurichioT R, RebelattoJ R. Relationship between dual task walking, cognition, and depression in oldest old people [J]. Int Psychogeriatr, 2016, 28(1): 31-38.
[9] WangX, MaY, WangJ, et al. Mobility and muscle strength together are more strongly correlated with falls in suburb-dwelling older Chinese [J]. Sci Rep, 2016, 6: 25420.
[10] YangL, HeC, PangM Y C. Reliability and validity of dual-task mobility assessments in people with chronic stroke [J]. PLoS One, 2016, 11(1): e0147833.
[11] IsaacsonS, O’brienA, LazaroJ D, et al. The JFK BIG study: the impact of LSVT BIG^® on dual task walking and mobility in persons with Parkinson’s disease [J]. J Phys Ther Sci, 2018, 30(4): 636-641.
[12] RachalL, SwankC, Trudelle-JacksonE, et al. Reliability and clinical feasibility of measuring dual-task gait in the inpatient rehabilitation setting following traumatic brain injury [J]. Physiother Theory Pract, 2018, 14: 1-7.
[13] TamuraK, KocherM, FinerL, et al. Reliability of clinically feasible dual-task tests: expanded timed get up and go test as a motor task on young healthy individuals [J]. Gait Posture, 2018, 60: 22-27.
[14] SmithE, WalshL, DoyleJ, et al. The reliability of the Quantitative Timed Up and Go Test (QTUG) measured over five consecutive days under single and dual-task conditions in community dwelling older adults [J]. Gait Posture, 2016, 43: 239-244.
[15] EaglesD, PerryJ J, SiroisM J, et al. Timed Up and Go predicts functional decline in older patients presenting to the emergency department following minor trauma [J]. Age Ageing, 2017, 46(2): 214-219.
[16] HafsteinsdottirT B, RensinkM, SchuurmansM. Clinimetric properties of the Timed Up and Go Test for patients with stroke: a systematic review [J]. Top Stroke Rehabil, 2014, 21(3): 197-210.
[17] ChanP P, Si TouJ I, TseM M, et al. Reliability and validity of the Timed Up and Go Test with a motor task in people with chronic stroke [J]. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 2017, 98(11): 2213-2220.
[18] MorrisS, MorrisM E, IansekR. Reliability of measurements obtained with the Timed “Up & Go” test in people with Parkinson disease [J]. Phys Ther, 2001, 81(2): 810-818.
[19] LearmonthY C, PaulL, McFadyenA K, et al. Reliability and clinical significance of mobility and balance assessments in multiple sclerosis [J]. Int J Rehabil Res, 2012, 35(1): 69-74.
[20] MarquesA, CruzJ, QuinaS, et al. Reliability, agreement and minimal detectable change of the Timed Up & Go and the 10-Meter Walk Tests in older patients with COPD [J]. COPD, 2016, 13(3): 279-287.
[21] ClemensS M, GaileyR S, BennettC L, et al. The Component Timed-Up-and-Go test: the utility and psychometric properties of using a mobile application to determine prosthetic mobility in people with lower limb amputations [J]. Clin Rehabil, 2017, 32(3): 388-397.
[22] MousaS M, RasheedyD, El-SoradyK E, et al. Beyond mobility assessment: Timed Up And Go test and its relationship to osteoporosis and fracture risk [J]. J Clin Gerontol Geriatr, 2016, 7(2): 48-52.
[23] BerglandA, JørgensenL, EmausN, et al. Mobility as a predictor of all-cause mortality in older men and women: 11.8 year follow-up in the Troms? study [J]. BMC Health Serv Res, 2017, 17(1): 22.
[24] BarryE, GalvinR, KeoghC, et al. Is the Timed Up and Go test a useful predictor of risk of falls in community dwelling older adults: a systematic review and meta- analysis [J]. BMC Geriatr, 2014, 14(1): 14.
[25] Benavent-CaballerV, Sendín-MagdalenaA, LisónJ F, et al. Physical factors underlying the Timed “Up and Go” test in older adults [J]. Geriatric nursing, 2016, 37(2): 122-127.
[26] SchoeneD, WuS M S, MikolaizakA S, et al. Discriminative ability and predictive validity of the Timed Up and Go test in identifying older people who fall: systematic review and meta-analysis [J]. J Am Geriatr Soc, 2013, 61(2): 202-208.
[27] LiF, HarmerP, FitzgeraldK, et al. Tai Chi and postural stability in patients with Parkinson's disease [J]. N Engl J Med, 2012, 366(6): 511-519.
[28] HorakF B, WrisleyD M, FrankJ. The Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) to differentiate balance deficits [J]. Phys Ther, 2009, 89(5): 484-498.
[29] FranchignoniF, HorakF, GodiM, et al. Using psychometric techniques to improve the balance evaluation systems test: the mini-BESTest [J]. J Rehabil Med, 2010, 42(4): 323-331.
[30] PadgettP K, JacobsJ V, KasserS L. Is the BESTest at Its Best? A suggested brief version based on interrater reliability, validity, internal consistency, and theoretical construct [J]. Phys Ther, 2012, 92(9): 1197-1207.
[31] DuncanR P, LeddyA L, CavanaughJ T, et al. Comparative utility of the BESTest, mini-BESTest, and brief-BESTest for predicting falls in individuals with Parkinson disease: a cohort study [J]. Phys Ther, 2013, 93(4): 542-550.
[32] TsangC S L, LiaoL R, ChungR C K, et al. Psychometric properties of the Mini-Balance Evaluation Systems Test (Mini-BESTest) in community-dwelling individuals with chronic stroke [J]. Phys Ther, 2013, 93(8): 1102-1115.
[33] HuangM, PangM Y. Psychometric properties of Brief-Balance Evaluation Systems Test (Brief-BESTest) in evaluating balance performance in individuals with chronic stroke [J]. Brain Behav, 2017, 7(3): e00649.
[34] JacomeC, CruzJ, OliveiraA, et al. Validity, reliability, and ability to identify fall status of the Berg Balance Scale, BESTest, Mini-BESTest, and Brief-BESTest in patients with COPD [J]. Phys Ther, 2016, 96(11): 1807-1815.
[35] YingyongyudhaA, SaengsirisuwanV, PanichapornW, et al. The Mini-Balance Evaluation Systems Test (Mini-BESTest) demonstrates higher accuracy in identifying older adult participants with history of falls than do the BESTest, Berg Balance Scale, or Timed Up and Go Test [J]. J Geriatr Phys Ther, 2016, 39(2): 64-70.
[36] MarquesA, AlmeidaS, CarvalhoJ, et al. Reliability, validity, and ability to identify fall status of the Balance Evaluation Systems Test, Mini-Balance Evaluation Systems Test, and Brief-Balance Evaluation Systems Test in older people living in the community [J]. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 2016, 97(12): 2166-2173.
[37] HuangM H, MillerK, SmithK, et al. Reliability, validity, and minimal detectable change of Balance Evaluation Systems Test and its short versions in older cancer survivors: a pilot study [J]. J Geriatr Phys Ther, 2016, 39(2): 58-63.
[38] Di CarloS, BraviniE, VercelliS, et al. The Mini-BESTest: a review of psychometric properties [J]. Int J Rehabil Res, 2016, 39(2): 97-105.
[39] LöfgrenN, LenholmE, ConradssonD, et al. The Mini-BESTest—a clinically reproducible tool for balance evaluations in mild to moderate Parkinson’s disease? [J]. BMC Neurol, 2014, 14(1): 235.
[40] 王云龙. 简易平衡评定系统测试的汉化及信效度检验 [D]. 唐山：华北理工大学, 2015.
[41] HamreC, BotolfsenP, TangenG G, et al. Interrater and test-retest reliability and validity of the Norwegian version of the BESTest and mini-BESTest in people with increased risk of falling [J]. BMC Geriatr, 2017, 17(1): 92.
[42] LampropoulouS I, BillisE, GedikoglouI A, et al. Reliability, validity and minimal detectable change of the Mini-BESTest in Greek participants with chronic stroke [J]. Physiother Theory Pract, 2018, 35(2): 171-182.
[43] OyamaC, OtakaY, OnitsukaK, et al. Reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the Mini-Balance Evaluation Systems Test in patients with subacute stroke [J]. Progr Rehabil Med, 2018, 3: 20180015.
[44] ChiuA Y Y, PangM Y C. Assessment of psychometric properties of various balance assessment tools in persons with cervical spondylotic myelopathy [J]. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther, 2017, 47(9): 673-682.
[45] LeungR W M, AlisonJ A, McKeoughZ J. Inter-rater and intra-rater reliability of the Brief-BESTest in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [J]. Clin Rehabil, 2018. doi: 10.1177/0269215518792044. [Epub ahead of print]
[46] JácomeC, FloresI, MartinsF, et al. Validity, reliability and minimal detectable change of the balance evaluation systems test (BESTest), mini-BESTest and brief-BESTest in patients with end-stage renal disease [J]. Disabil Rehabil. 2018, 40(26): 3171-3176.
[47] SantosS M, Da SilvaR A, TerraM B, et al. Balance versus resistance training on postural control in patients with Parkinson's disease: a randomized controlled trial [J]. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med, 2017, 53(2): 173-183.
[48] SteibS, KlamrothS, GaβnerH, et al. Perturbation during treadmill training improves dynamic balance and gait in Parkinson’s disease: a single-blind randomized controlled pilot trial [J]. Neurorehabil Neural Repair, 2017, 31(8): 758-768.
[49] QuinnG, ComberL, GalvinR, et al. The ability of clinical balance measures to identify falls risk in multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis [J]. Clin Rehabil, 2018, 32(5): 571-582.
[50] LötzkeD, OstermannT, BüssingA. Argentine tango in Parkinson disease—a systematic review and meta-analysis [J]. BMC Neurol, 2015, 15(1): 226.
[51] La PortaF, FranceschiniM, CaselliS, et al. Unified Balance Scale: an activity-based, bed to community, and aetiology-independent measure of balance calibrated with Rasch analysis [J]. J Rehabil Med, 2011, 43(5): 435-444.
[52] La PortaF, FranceschiniM, CaselliS, et al. Unified Balance Scale: classic psychometric and clinical properties [J]. J Rehabil Med, 2011, 43(5): 445-453.
[53] AgmonM, LavieL, DoumasM. The Association between hearing loss, postural control, and mobility in older adults: a systematic review [J]. J Am Acad Audiol, 2017, 28(6): 575-588.
[54] SibleyK M, HoweT, LambS E, et al. Recommendations for a core outcome set for measuring standing balance in adult populations: a consensus-based approach [J]. PLoS One, 2015, 10(3): e0120568.
[55] de NunzioA, ZucchellaC, SpicciatoF, et al. Biofeedback rehabilitation of posture and weight bearing distribution in stroke: a center of foot pressure analysis [J]. Funct Neurol, 2014, 29(2): 127-134.
[56] StraudiS, SeveriniG, Sabbagh CharabatiA, et al. The effects of video game therapy on balance and attention in chronic ambulatory traumatic brain injury: an exploratory study [J]. BMC Neurol, 2017, 17(1): 86.

自主姿势控制能力评估的研究进展

Advance in Voluntary Postural Control Assessment (review)

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	邵伟婷, 雷江华. 反应中断再定向干预孤独症谱系障碍儿童刻板语言的效果：Scoping综述[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2024, 30(1): 10-20.
[2]	周治宁, 周容, 肖燕文, 王博文, 吕娇娇, 刘宇. 多靶区经颅直流电刺激对健康成年人工作记忆-姿势控制双任务表现的影响[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2024, 30(1): 21-28.
[3]	王航宇, 葛可可, 范永红, 都丽露, 邹敏, 封磊. 基于ICD-11和ICF主动式音乐疗法改善认知障碍老年人认知功能的系统综述[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2024, 30(1): 36-43.
[4]	闻嘉宁, 金秋艳, 张琦, 李杰, 司琦. 认知参与型身体活动对发展儿童青少年执行功能的效果：基于ICF的系统综述[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2024, 30(1): 44-53.
[5]	葛可可, 范永红, 王航宇, 都丽露, 李长江, 邹敏. 失眠老年人正念干预健康效益的系统综述[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2024, 30(1): 54-60.
[6]	张婧雅, 邹敏, 孙宏伟, 孙昌隆, 朱峻同. 听障儿童青少年焦虑或抑郁情绪心理干预效果的系统综述[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2023, 29(9): 1004-1011.
[7]	王俊宇, 杨永, 袁逊, 谢婷, 庄洁. 高强度间歇训练对健康儿童青少年执行功能效果的系统综述[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2023, 29(9): 1012-1020.
[8]	魏晓微, 杨剑, 魏春艳. 特殊教育学校孤独症谱系障碍儿童参与适应性瑜伽活动的心理与行为效益的系统综述[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2023, 29(9): 1021-1028.
[9]	杨亚茹, 杨剑. 基于WHO-HPS架构学校身体活动相关健康服务及其健康效益：系统综述的系统综述[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2023, 29(9): 1040-1047.
[10]	史佳伟, 李凌宇, 杨浩杰, 王琴潞, 邹海欧. 预康复对全膝关节置换术后患者的有效性：系统综述的系统综述[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2023, 29(9): 1057-1064.
[11]	蒋长好, 黄辰, 高晓妍, 戴元富, 赵国明. 神经反馈训练对老年人认知功能效果的系统综述[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2023, 29(8): 903-909.
[12]	魏晓微, 杨剑, 魏春艳, 贺启令. 学校环境下适应性体育课程促进智力与发展性残疾儿童心理运动发展的系统综述[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2023, 29(8): 910-918.
[13]	张园, 杨剑. 基于世界卫生组织健康促进学校架构的学校健康服务及效果：Scoping综述[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2023, 29(7): 791-799.
[14]	王少璞, 陈钢. 基于世界卫生组织健康促进学校架构的心理行为健康服务及其健康效益：系统综述的系统综述[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2023, 29(7): 800-807.
[15]	张瑞明, 王凯, 尹锐, 王海亮, 莫言. 失重条件下舱外手套外骨骼助力效果的评估方法[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2023, 29(7): 856-861.