RESUMO
Background: In young adults, there is evidence that free arm movements do not help to compensate muscle fatigue-induced deteriorations in dynamic balance performance. However, the postural control system in youth is immature, and as a result, the use of arm movements may provide a compensatory "upper body strategy" to correct fatigue-related balance impairments. Thus, the purpose of the present study was to compare the effects of free vs. restricted arm movement on dynamic balance performance prior and following exercise-induced muscle fatigue. Methods: Forty-three healthy youth (19 females; mean age: 12.8 ± 1.9 years) performed the Y Balance Test-Lower Quarter before and immediately after a fatiguing exercise (i.e., repetitive vertical bipedal box jumps until failure) using two different arm positions: free (move the arms freely) and restricted (keep the arms akimbo) arm movement. Results: Muscle fatigue (p ≤ 0.033; 0.10 ≤ η p 2 ≤ 0.33) and restriction of arm movement (p ≤ 0.005; 0.17 ≤ η p 2 ≤ 0.46) resulted in significantly deteriorated dynamic balance performance. However, the interactions between the two did not reach the level of significance (p ≥ 0.091; 0.01 ≤ η p 2 ≤ 0.07). Conclusion: Our findings indicate that the use of an "upper body strategy" (i.e., free arm position) has no compensatory effect on muscle fatigue-induced dynamic balance deteriorations in healthy youth.
RESUMO
Background: The Y Balance Test-Upper Quarter (YBT-UQ) is a cost-effective, well-established, closed kinetic chain test to assess inter-limb asymmetries in the upper quarter that could negatively affect swimming performance. Thus, the aim of the present study was to determine YBT-UQ performances and inter-limb differences as well as its association with swimming performance in athletes with diverging levels of expertise. Methods: Forty female and male competitive swimmers (age range: 10-22 years) with different expertise levels (A-squad: n = 9, B-squad: n = 12, C-squad: n = 19) were tested (reach distances for the YBT-UQ) and swimming performance was calculated using the ratio of individual to world best time. Results: YBT-UQ performances (i.e., inferolateral reach direction for the dominant arm: p = .027, ηp2 = .12 and the non-dominant arm: p = .031, ηp2 = .17) but not YBT-UQ inter-limb differences significantly differed between groups and were largest in swimmers with the lowest expertise level (i.e., C-squad). Further, YBT-UQ performances (i.e., inferolateral reach direction [r = -.68 to -.70, both p < .05] and composite score [r = -.65 to -.67, both p < .05] for both arms and medial reach direction for the non-dominant arm [r = -.64, p < .05]) but not inter-limb differences were significantly and negatively correlated with swimming performance among B-squad swimmers. Conclusions: Our results suggest that inter-limb differences in upper quarter mobility/stability are not influenced by the level of expertise and have no significant associations with swimming performance. However, greater reach distances were correlated with lower swimming performance for the B-squad swimmers indicating that a training-related increase in upper quarter mobility/stability could worsen swimming performance in those athletes.
