Cross-sectional analysis identifies balance factors in young inline skaters, highlighting age and body mass index impacts.
Balance is a crucial component in inline skating, significantly contributing to both performance enhancement and injury prevention. Despite its importance, limited research has examined how biomechanical and demographic factors jointly influence postural balance in young athletes. This cross-sectional study aimed to identify the factors affecting balance in inline skating athletes by analyzing the roles of single-leg stand, tandem stand, age, and body mass index (BMI). A total of 49 inline skating athletes aged 4–18 years participated in this study, comprising 20 boys and 29 girls. Static balance was measured using single-leg and tandem-stand tests, conducted with the HumanTrak Movement Analysis System (3D infrared motion tracking system, Azure Kinect DK, USA) in the physiotherapy laboratory. Data were analyzed using Structural Equation Modeling Partial Least Squares (SEM-PLS). The analysis revealed that the tandem stand left, tandem stand right, and single leg stand left significantly influenced the balance performance. Younger age and BMI within the normal range were associated with better stability. The model’s construct validity was confirmed by the average veriance extracted (AVE) values exceeding 0.5. Specifically, the tandem stand left (X3 with coefficient 0.758) had the strongest positive effect, followed by the tandem stand right (X4 with coefficient 0.215) and age (X7 with coefficient 0.065. In contrast, single leg stand left (X1; coefficient 0.182) and BMI (X8; coefficient 0.021) showed negative effects, as higher sway indicates poorer stability. This study highlights the importance of tandem stand and single leg stand balance, as well as age and BMI, as key factors influencing postural control in young inline skating athletes. The findings support the development of targeted training strategies aimed at improving stability and reducing the risk of injury.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Arti et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: