Search published articles


Showing 2 results for Static Stability

M Anbarian, H Khodavisi,
Volume 9, Issue 1 (3-2011)
Abstract

The foot represents a small base of support as an important biomechanical parameter that the body maintains balance. It is assumed that postural stability performance could be affected by even minor alteration in the support surface in upright standing position. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine if individuals with different foot types would demonstrate differences in static postural stability performance. Sixty adolescent girls were categorized into three groups depending on their bilateral foot types namely, pronated, supinated and rectus feet. Foot types defined by Navicular-drop measures. We measured static stability performance with the Balance Error Scoring System once firm and once on a foam surface. ANOVA with repeated measures was employed for statistical analyses (p<0.05). Results showed no significant differences between individuals with pronated and rectus feet were revealed for static stability scores while standing on the firm surface. Pronated group showed a poor balance performance while tested on the foam surface in comparison with rectus group. Subjects with supinated feet had a poorer static stability performance on both firm and foam surfaces than others groups. These results demonstrated that static stability performance could be affected by foot type


Maryam Ghorbani, Rasoul Yaali,
Volume 23, Issue 30 (1-2026)
Abstract

Aim: Different postural stability and functional movements may play an important role in secondary injuries in people with flexible flat feet compared to people with normal feet. However, the difference between static and dynamic stability and functional movements of people with and without flexible flatfeet has not been investigated. Therefore, the current study was conducted with the aim of comparing static and dynamic stability and functional movements of subjects with and without flexible flatfeet and examined the relationship between functional movements and static and dynamic stability.
Methods: In the cross-sectional study, 96 subjects after evaluating the medial longitudinal arch of the foot with navicular drop test were divided into two groups, flexible flat feet group (n=25) and normal feet group (n=71). Functional performance using functional movements screening test, static stability using the Sharpened Romberg balance test, dynamic stability using the Y balance test were measured. In order to compare the parameters measured in two groups, non-parametric U-Mann-Whitney test was used.
Results: The scores of functional movements and static stability in the normal feet group were significantly higher than the flexible flatfeet group (p≤0.05). The total score of the Y test was not significantly different between the two groups (p≥0.05). In the group of normal feet, a significant correlation was observed between functional movement scores and dynamic stability (p≤0.05).
Conclusion: These results show that subjects with flexible flatfeet have different movement performance and static stability compared to subjects with normal feet, but they have similar dynamic stability. It may indicate that there is no connection between static and dynamic stability and these two functions are separate from each other.

 

Page 1 from 1     

© 2026 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Research in Sport Medicine and Technology

Designed & Developed by: Yektaweb