Reactive Balance Differences Between Collegiate Sports

Abstract

Static and dynamic postural stability have been characterized in athletes and shown to differ across sports. However, these tests of stability may not specifically capture the balance required for reactive athletic movements. The Push-and-Release (P&R) test is a standardized clinical tool used to assess reactive postural control in balance-impaired populations. PURPOSE: To examine differences between sport team and task (single [ST] and dual task [DT]) in reactive postural response measures. METHODS: 40 healthy, male athletes (age 18.50 ± 0.75; body mass index [BMI] 24.11 ± 2.38) were recruited from 3 collegiate teams: baseball (n=12), lacrosse (n=17), and swimming (n=11). Reactive postural responses were assessed using the P&R in backward and forward directions under ST and DT (concurrent verbal cognitive task) conditions. All conditions were performed with eyes closed. Inertial sensors on the sternum, lumbar, feet, and right tibia were used to assess step latency (L), time of first heel contact (HC), and time to stabilization (TTS). A sensor on the tester’s hand was used to determine release time. To assess if postural response measures differ by sport and task, linear mixed effects models with random intercepts and stratified by direction (forward or backward), were used and adjusted for age and BMI. RESULTS: Lacrosse players had faster L compared to baseball players in the forward direction (p=0.018). No other differences by sport were observed. In the forward direction, DT outcomes were slower than ST outcomes (L: p<0.0001; HC: p=0.0004; TTS: p=0.0064). In the backward direction, L was slower in the DT condition (p=0.0034), but no task differences were found for HC or TTS (p=0.0628 and p=0.8733, respectively). CONCLUSION: In the forward direction only, DT slowed all postural responses. While L differed between lacrosse and baseball in the forward direction, no other differences were found across sports. As most outcomes were unaffected by sport, the P&R may be a clinically relevant assessment in athletics. However, due to the limited sample size, caution should be applied when interpreting these findings and future studies are needed. Supported by PAC 12 Student Athlete Health & Wellbeing (PI: Fino, Dibble) and University of Utah Study Design and Biostatistics Center through NCATS Grant 8UL1TR000105.