Design of a Freely Accessible Web Application (Instrument for the Measurement of Balance in Primary Education, IMEP) for the Assessment of Static and Dynamic Balance in Children Aged 6-9 Years Based on Force Platforms

Abstract

Background: The proper development of balance is essential in the acquisition of a correct physical condition, as well as in the evolutionary follow-up at early ages, and its periodic evaluation is very relevant in the educational environment. Objectives: The objective of this research was to design an accessible web application for static and dynamic balance assessment, based on a force platform and motion analysis software. Methods: The Single leg balance test (SLB), Tandem balance test (TBT), and Y balance test (YBT) were performed on a sample of 75 children aged 6 to 9 years. Results: The results show that static balance is more complex at an older age, greater standing height, and with eyes closed (p < 0.001). Regarding the center of pressure (COP), its variability was greater in girls owing to a lower Total Force (TF) at the time of the test (p < 0.05). Parallel observation with the Kinovea software has made it possible to elaborate a scale from 1 to 10 points for integration into an open-access web application (IMEP) to assess static and dynamic balance. Conclusions: The creation of an ad hoc application for primary school teachers and students has been possible by using validated devices obtaining a rating scale, which facilitate the monitoring of students' functional evolution and offers the possibility of scheduling physical education sessions with a preventive approach as well as a focus on improving physical condition.

Keywords: balance; educational application; motion analysis; physical activity; primary education.

Figure 1

Adequacy of the measurement environment and joint markers. Note: (Left) Study environment; (Center-left): frontal marker, umbilicus; (Center-right): dorsal marker, lumbar L3; (Right): lateral markers, acromion, and greater trochanter.

Figure 2

Representation of the balance tests used. Note: (Left): Single-leg test; (Center): tandem balance test; (Right): Y balance test.

Figure 3

Study workflow. Note: (Left): Performance of the balance tests; (Center-left): registration of variables; (Center-right): analysis with the Kinovea software; (Right): conversion to the equilibrium rating scale.

Figure 4

Sequence of use of the IMEP web application. Note: (Left): Application input interface; (Center): example of SLB test (two images); (Right): individual results search engine; * = mandatory answer.

Figure 5

Variation in the complexity score as a function of eye opening, age, and standing size. Note: SLB = Single-leg balance. TBT = Tandem balance test.

Figure 6

Variation in the balance score with eyes open or closed (A) and POP by sex (B).

Figure 7

Variation in the complexity score as a function of total strength (A), COP, and sex (B).

Figure 8

Raw score for the total amount of movement, together with adjusted and rescaled values for sex (left), foot size (center), and age (right).