| ARE THERE DIFFERENCES IN FUNCTIONAL REACH TEST PERFORMANCE BETWEEN TWO LEVELS OF EDSS IN PEOPLE WITH MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS? |
| Paper ID : 1170-SPORTCONGRESS |
| Authors |
|
Seyyed Erfan Mohammadalinezhad *1, Ebrahim Ebrahimi2, Farideh Babakhani1, Mohamadreza Hatefi1 1Department of Sport Injuries and Corrective Exercises, Faculty of Physical Education, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran 2Department of Sport Injuries and Biomechanics, Faculty of Sport Sciences and Health, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran |
| Abstract |
| Introduction: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic, immune-mediated disease of the central nervous system that can lead to progressive physical disability and postural instability. Evaluating balance and functional reach is essential for detecting subtle impairments and monitoring disease progression. The Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) is widely used to assess disability in MS, but it may not fully reflect functional balance capacity. The Functional Reach Test (FRT) is a simple, valid, and reliable tool to measure the limits of stability and dynamic balance. Comparing FRT performance across different EDSS levels may help clarify the relationship between disability severity and balance function in MS patients. Methods: Twenty female individuals with MS participated in this study and were divided into two groups based on their EDSS scores: one group with an EDSS of 2.0 and another with an EDSS of 2.5, each consisting of ten participants. Dynamic balance was assessed using the Functional Reach Test (FRT). Data analysis was performed using an independent t-test to compare ETUG performance between the two groups. Results: The results indicated no statistically significant difference in FRT performance between the two groups (p > 0.05). Participants with EDSS scores of 2.0 and 2.5 showed similar reach distances, suggesting comparable balance performance despite slight differences in disability level. Conclusion: Although participants with higher EDSS values exhibited a trend toward reduced reach distance, the difference was not significant. These findings suggest that mild variations in disability level (within the EDSS range of 2.0–2.5) may not produce measurable changes in dynamic balance as assessed by the FRT. Further studies with larger samples and additional balance measures are recommended to confirm these findings. |
| Keywords |
| Multiple sclerosis, Expanded Disability Status Scale, Functional Reach Test |
| Status: Abstract Accepted (Poster Presentation) |
