Home > Journals > Medicina dello Sport > Past Issues > Medicina dello Sport 2015 June;68(2) > Medicina dello Sport 2015 June;68(2):303-11

CURRENT ISSUE
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Reprints

MEDICINA DELLO SPORT

A Journal on Sports Medicine


Official Journal of the Italian Sports Medicine Federation
Indexed/Abstracted in: BIOSIS Previews, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 0,163


eTOC

 

ORTHOPEDICAL AREA  


Medicina dello Sport 2015 June;68(2):303-11

Copyright © 2015 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English, Italian

Postural analysis contribution in handstand position

Scotton C. 1, Grosso G. 1, Ferraris L. 2, Caire M. 1, Pizzigalli L. 3

1 SUISM-Centro Servizi, University of Turin, Turin, Italy;
2 FMSI-Sports medicine Association, Genoa, Italy;
3 Research Center on Physical Education SUISM, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy


PDF  


AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate the center of pressure (CoP) variables, during the handstand position (VRR) and their relation with the stand position, in 22 female gymnasts (mean±SD) (15.6±5.7) years old; height (152.0±0.1) cm; weight (44.1±11.3) kg and weekly hours of training (19.4±2.6).
METHODS: The gymnasts were divided into two groups according to the results of the handstand position maintenance. In group A, were added the gymnasts who have held the handstand position for less than 40 s, while in group B were included gymnasts who have held the handstand for a time longer than or equal to 40 s. For the postural balance tests were used: the stabilometric platform Prokin PK (214 P) and the biaxial accelerometer (TK-trunk sensor) for recording trunk movements. The protocol consisted of standard balance tests with eyes open and closed in bipodalic (60 s) and monopodalic (30 s) conditions. Than it was required to maintain the handstand position as long as possible on the stabilometric platform.
RESULTS: Both groups are much more stable with eyes open (P<0.005). Both in bipodalic and in monopodalic stance tests group B showed more postural stability than group A, in bipodalic stance with eyes open (area P=0.0147), in bipodalic stance with eyes closed (antero-posterior mean velocity P=0.0415) and in right monopodalic stance test in eyes closed condition (area P=0.0336). These CoP differences persist also during the handstand position where group B showed more time maintenance than group A (P<0.005).
CONCLUSION: It is possible to conclude that for a good maintenance of handstand position it could be suggested to perform this element on unstable planes and execute balance exercises without visual inputs during training sessions.

top of page

Publication History

Cite this article as

Corresponding author e-mail