OBJECTIVES To determine whether any difference exist between reach distance performance for the ante-rior (AN), posteromedial (PM), and posterolateral (PL) reach directions of the SEBT and the modified SEBT (mSEBT). METHODS Twelve participants were recruited in the study (5 males, 7 females; age: 24.1 ±2.1yrs; height: 175.5 ± 5.3 cm; mass: 70.3 ± 15.1 kg). The average of the 3 reach trials in each direction on each leg on both tests were calculated. Data was collected after 6 practice trials in each direction on both tests. Paired Samples t-tests were performed to compare the normalized reach distances between the SEBT and mSEBT. Normalized values were calculated as a percentage of mean reach distance to a participant s limb-length. RESULTS For the normalized reach distances, both sides of the PM and PL reach directions showed a sta-tistically significant difference between the SEBT and mSEBT (p < .05). There was no statistical significant difference between the tests in the AN (right [p = .203]; left [p = .357]) reach directions. CONCLUSIONS Differences in reach distance performance were only found in both sides of the PM and PL directions between the SEBT and mSEBT. These findings may indicate that the unstable surface may lead to an increase in the difficulty of testing. Clinicians may consider to utilize the mSEBT to assess dynamic postural control in physically active young adult population. Further research is required with the use of physically active young adult population.
Conflicts of Interest