The Effects of Alcohol on Static Balance in University Students

Effects of external focus of attention on balance: a short review

[Purpose] The present study reviewed studies that examined the effects of attentional focus on balance. [Methods] Keywords such as “attentional”, “focus”, and “balance” were used to find relevant research papers in PubMed (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed). Forty-five papers were found, and 18 of them were used for this study, excluding review papers and papers irrelevant to the topic of this study. [Results] Among the papers used for the review, the number of papers in which external focus produced effective outcomes was 15 (83.3%). The number of papers in which both external and internal focus produced effective outcomes was 2 (11.1%). The number of paper in which no instruction about attentional focus was effective was 1 (5.5%), and the number of papers in which internal focus was effective was zero. [Conclusion] This short review suggests clinical implications about how physical therapists can use attentional focus for balance rehabilitation of patients. Instructions about external focus of attention can generally be useful as a method to improve posture and balance control. Furthermore, the present reviews indicates that external focus of attention would be more useful in a rehabilitation stage in which the difficulty level of balance performance is gradually increased.

Quantitative comparison of transient elastography (TE), shear wave elastography (SWE) and liver biopsy results of patients with chronic liver disease

[Purpose] The purpose of this study was to carry out a comparitive analysis of hepatic fibrosis results of the liver hardness of patients with chronic liver disease as measured by elastography (TE), shear wave elastography (SWE), and liver biopsy. [Subjects and Methods] This study was a retrospective analysis of 304 patients who underwent SWE and TE before and after liver biopsy, taken from among patients who had been checked for liver fibrosis by liver biopsy between August 2013 and August 2014. We used receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve to prove the diagnostic significance of liver stiffness, and then analyzed the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of SWE and TE, as well as the kappa index through cross-analysis of SWE, TE, and liver biopsy. [Results] For liver hardness, the sensitivity of SWE was 84.39%, the specificity of SWE was 97.92%, the accuracy of SWE was 87.33%, the positive predictive value of SWE was 99.32%, and the negative predictive value of SWE was 63.51%. The sensitivity of TE was 94.80%, the specificity of TE was 77.08%, the accuracy of TE was 90.95%, the positive predictive value of TE was 93.97%, and the negative predictive value of TE was 80.43%. [Conclusion] It is our opinion that SWE and TE are non-invasive methods that are more effective than the invasive methods used for diagnosing liver hardness. Invasive methods cover only a section of liver tissue, and are more likely to cause side effects during biopsy.