The interactions between agonist-to-antagonist muscle strength performance and plantar pressure distribution, foot contact area, and impulse in novice ballet dancers

Article type: Research Article

Authors: Arinli, Yağmur^a | Umutlu, Gökhan^{b; *} | Pehlevan, Zekai^c

Affiliations: [a] Department of State Conservatory, Mersin University, Mersin, Turkey | [b] Department of Sport and Exercise Science, Park University, Parkville, MO, USA | [c] Faculty of Sports Sciences, Mersin University, Mersin, Turkey

Correspondence: [*] Corresponding author: Gökhan Umutlu, Department of Sport and Exercise Science, Park University, 8700 NW River Park Dr, Parkville, MO 64152, USA. E-mail: gokhan.umutlu@park.edu.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Hip, trunk, knee, and ankle/foot muscles may lead to increased variability in the components of balance and plantar pressure distribution (PPD) analysis. However, the role of these muscle groups in the PPD of different ballet techniques in novice ballet dancers has not previously been studied. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to examine whether balance and PPD vary among five different ballet techniques and correlate with the agonist-to-antagonist strength performance of trunk, knee, hip, and ankle muscles in adolescent ballet dancers. METHODS: The anthropometric parameters, muscle strength performance, balance, and PPD of sixty healthy female ballet dancers (age: 14.36 ± 2.18 y) were measured at 48-h intervals. RESULTS: The forefoot’s PPD was significantly greater than the midfoot and rearfoot for all techniques (p= 0.000). The percent plantar load of forefoot during développé à la seconde (side, front, back), passé, and penché was greater than midfoot (166.56%, 161.51%, 168.11%, 165.14%, 174.04%) and rearfoot (47.75%, 32.84%, 43.83%, 48.73%, 49.66) for all techniques, respectively. The forefoot’s PPD, impulse, and contact area during all techniques were significantly correlated with the trunk muscle strength ratio (p< 0.05). CONCLUSION: Ballet dancers with higher trunk muscle strength imbalance showed a greater percentage difference in pressure load between the left and right foot in the anterior and posterior directions, poor balance, aggravated trunk imbalance, increased PPD, contact area, and impulse in the forefoot during each technique.

Keywords: Upper extremity, lower extremity, biomechanics, joint range of motion, kinematics

DOI: 10.3233/BMR-220406

Journal: Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation, vol. 36, no. 6, pp. 1385-1397, 2023