Why the study?
The relative contributions of perturbation intensity and predictability to the generalizability of reactive balance training remain unclear.
Does the intensity schedule of reactive balance training affect improvements in balance recovery in healthy young adults?
Population
36 healthy young adults (20-35 years)
Comparison
Fixed high intensity vs low-to-high intensity vs variable intensity RBT schedules
Design
Randomized study
Key result
Reactive balance training improved step reactions to untrained perturbations across all participants (p<0.0001), but these improvements did not differ significantly between fixed high, low-to-high, and variable intensity training schedules.
Authors
Loading...
No intensity schedule superior for untrained perturbations in young adults; leaves open optimal RBT dosing for clinical fall prevention.
RCT (n=36)
Open-label
Randomly allocated using sealed envelopes
No
Does the intensity schedule of reactive balance training affect improvements in balance recovery in healthy young adults?
p-value: p=0.29
Improvements in step reactions to untrained perturbations did not differ between training groups, highlighting the importance of multi-directional variability over specific intensity schedules.
Mansfield et al. (2025) conducted an RCT in Healthy young adults (n=36). Reactive balance training intensity schedules (fixed high, low-to-high, variable) vs. Between-group comparison of the three schedules was evaluated on Number of recovery steps and proportion of multi-step reactions following a perturbation in an untrained direction (p=0.29). Reactive balance training improved step reactions to untrained perturbations across all participants (p<0.0001), but these improvements did not differ significantly between fixed high, low-to-high, and variable intensity training schedules.