Y-Balance Scores Between Injured and Uninjured Athletes: A Systematic Review of Prospective Cohort Studies
Presentation Type
Poster Presentation
Category
STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics)
Abstract/Artist Statement
Y-Balance Scores Between Injured and Uninjured Athletes: A Systematic Review of Prospective Cohort Studies
Unequivocal evidence does not exist showing that the current recommended musculoskeletal assessment of a PPE is effective at consistently and accurately identifying athletes at risk for musculoskeletal injury, nor preventing such injuries. A different proposed injury risk screening measure is the Lower Quarter Y-Balance Test (LQ-YBT), a simplified and instrumented adaptation of the SEBT in which dynamic, unilateral balance is tested in anterior, posteromedial, and posterolateral reach directions. The objective was to compare anterior reach asymmetry (ARA) and composite score (CS) in injured and uninjured athletic populations to determine the injury risk identification efficacy of the lower quarter y-balance test (LQ-YBT).
Researchers searched the database of PubMed in October 2021. Eligible studies were peer-reviewed articles that included the use of LQ-YBT individually, reported injury data, reported composite and/or anterior reach asymmetry, and had participants that were a part of the athletic population. Studies were excluded if the SEBT was used, data was not presented in a usable form, and the manuscript was not available in English. Researchers extracted data during the primary review. The extracted data included: study design, the purpose of study, population demographic, injury data, composite score, and asymmetry reach asymmetry. Studies that were included reported averages of composite scores, anterior reach asymmetry, and/or raw data that could be used to calculate these measures. The standard calculation to find the CS is [(ANT+PM+PL)/3x Limb Length] x100. To determine ARA, researchers calculated the absolute value difference between right and left scores, |R ANT - L ANT|
Past reviews of similar research included SEBT data, however, the more simplified LQ-YBT is now more commonly used and procedurally different. A recent systematic review looked specifically at the predictive validity of a LQ-YBT injury risk cut-off score, however, in our research we found many cohorts did not even achieve the cut-off scores. A comparison between injured and non-injured group scores was needed to investigate the ability of the test scores to distinguish between athletes that get injured or stay healthy.
Our systematic review of nine articles specifically examining LQ-YBT showed little observable differences in CS and ARA between injured and uninjured groups of athletes. These findings preclude recommendations for the use of LQ-YBT as a screening measure in a PPE for general athletic populations. Future research using the LQ-YBT in specific athletic subpopulations may be able to provide new predictive cut-off scores that will establish clinical relevance for screening in those populations alone. Other possible uses for the LQ-YBT identified may be specifically screening for ankle injury risk or longitudinal comparison of an individual in physical rehabilitation for a prior lower extremity injury.
Mentor Name
Shane Murphy
Y-Balance Scores Between Injured and Uninjured Athletes: A Systematic Review of Prospective Cohort Studies
UC North Ballroom
Y-Balance Scores Between Injured and Uninjured Athletes: A Systematic Review of Prospective Cohort Studies
Unequivocal evidence does not exist showing that the current recommended musculoskeletal assessment of a PPE is effective at consistently and accurately identifying athletes at risk for musculoskeletal injury, nor preventing such injuries. A different proposed injury risk screening measure is the Lower Quarter Y-Balance Test (LQ-YBT), a simplified and instrumented adaptation of the SEBT in which dynamic, unilateral balance is tested in anterior, posteromedial, and posterolateral reach directions. The objective was to compare anterior reach asymmetry (ARA) and composite score (CS) in injured and uninjured athletic populations to determine the injury risk identification efficacy of the lower quarter y-balance test (LQ-YBT).
Researchers searched the database of PubMed in October 2021. Eligible studies were peer-reviewed articles that included the use of LQ-YBT individually, reported injury data, reported composite and/or anterior reach asymmetry, and had participants that were a part of the athletic population. Studies were excluded if the SEBT was used, data was not presented in a usable form, and the manuscript was not available in English. Researchers extracted data during the primary review. The extracted data included: study design, the purpose of study, population demographic, injury data, composite score, and asymmetry reach asymmetry. Studies that were included reported averages of composite scores, anterior reach asymmetry, and/or raw data that could be used to calculate these measures. The standard calculation to find the CS is [(ANT+PM+PL)/3x Limb Length] x100. To determine ARA, researchers calculated the absolute value difference between right and left scores, |R ANT - L ANT|
Past reviews of similar research included SEBT data, however, the more simplified LQ-YBT is now more commonly used and procedurally different. A recent systematic review looked specifically at the predictive validity of a LQ-YBT injury risk cut-off score, however, in our research we found many cohorts did not even achieve the cut-off scores. A comparison between injured and non-injured group scores was needed to investigate the ability of the test scores to distinguish between athletes that get injured or stay healthy.
Our systematic review of nine articles specifically examining LQ-YBT showed little observable differences in CS and ARA between injured and uninjured groups of athletes. These findings preclude recommendations for the use of LQ-YBT as a screening measure in a PPE for general athletic populations. Future research using the LQ-YBT in specific athletic subpopulations may be able to provide new predictive cut-off scores that will establish clinical relevance for screening in those populations alone. Other possible uses for the LQ-YBT identified may be specifically screening for ankle injury risk or longitudinal comparison of an individual in physical rehabilitation for a prior lower extremity injury.