Reliability of the measures of weight-bearing distribution obtained during quiet stance by digital scales in subjects with and without hemiparesis.

Described as an alternative way of assessing weight-bearing asymmetries, the measures obtained from digital scales have been used as an index to classify weight-bearing distribution. This study aimed to describe the intra-test and the test/retest reliability of measures in subjects with and without hemiparesis during quiet stance. The percentage of body weight borne by one limb was calculated for a sample of subjects with hemiparesis and for a control group that was matched by gender and age. A two-way analysis of variance was used to verify the intra-test reliability. This analysis was calculated using the differences between the averages of the measures obtained during single, double or triple trials. The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was utilized and data plotted using the Bland-Altman method. The intra-test analysis showed significant differences, only observed in the hemiparesis group, between the measures obtained by single and triple trials. Excellent and moderate ICC values (0.69-0.84) between test and retest were observed in the hemiparesis group, while for control groups ICC values (0.41-0.74) were classified as moderate, progressing from almost poor for measures obtained by a single trial to almost excellent for those obtained by triple trials. In conclusion, good reliability ranging from moderate to excellent classifications was found for participants with and without hemiparesis. Moreover, an improvement of the repeatability was observed with fewer trials for participants with hemiparesis, and with more trials for participants without hemiparesis.

Reliability of the Functional Reach Test and the influence of anthropometric characteristics on test results in subjects with hemiparesis.

First designed as an alternative method of assessing balance and susceptibility to falls among elderly, the Functional Reach Test (FR) has also been used among patients with hemiparesis. Then this study aimed to describe the intra- and inter-rater and the test/re-test reliability of the FR measure in subjects with and without hemiparesis while verifying anthropometric influences on the measurements. The FR was administered to a sample of subjects with hemiparesis and to a control group that was matched by gender and age. A two-way analysis of variance was used to verify the intra-rater reliability. It was calculated using the differences between the averages of the measures obtained during single, double or triple trials. The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was utilized and data plotted using the Bland-Altman method. Associations were analyzed using Pearson's correlation coefficient. In general, the intra-rater analysis did not show significant differences between the measures for the single, double or triple trials. Excellent ICC values were observed, and there were no significant associations with anthropometric parameters for the hemiparesis and control subjects. FR showed good reliability for patients with and without hemiparesis and the test measurements were not significantly associated with the anthropometric characteristics of the subjects.

Is it correct to always consider weight-bearing asymmetrically distributed in individuals with hemiparesis?

Injuries may cause unilateral deterioration of brain areas related to postural control resulting in lateralized motor disability with abnormal asymmetry in weight-bearing distribution. Although overloading toward the nonaffected limb has been described as the preferred posture among individuals with hemiparesis, characterization of the weight-bearing asymmetry is poorly and indirectly described. Therefore, this study aimed to describe weight-bearing distribution during upright stance, establishing criteria to consider asymmetry in hemiparesis when analyzed within the limits defined by controls matched by age and gender. Forty subjects with (n = 20) or without hemiparesis (n = 20) were included in procedures to record weight-bearing values between hemibodies, and these values were used to calculate a symmetry ratio. Control presented 95% confidence interval (CI) of the mean for symmetry ratio ranging from 0.888 to 1.072, defining limits to symmetry. Four subjects with hemiparesis (20%) had symmetry ratios inside limits defined by controls (i.e., weight-bearing symmetrically distributed), and 11 (55%) subjects without hemiparesis showed symmetry ratios outside the limits, suggesting asymmetrical weight-bearing distribution. It was concluded that asymmetry, when present in a control group, was more frequently overloading nonpredominantly used hemibody (nondominant side), differing from a hemiparesis group commonly forced to assume the nonaffected side as the predominantly used hemibody and where the overload was observed.