search
Back to results

The Effects of Weighted Waist-Hooping

Primary Purpose

Healthy

Status
Completed
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
weighted waist-hooping
Sponsored by
VA Puget Sound Health Care System
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional basic science trial for Healthy focused on measuring Weighted waist-hooping, Balance, Proprioception, Neurocom

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - 45 Years (Adult)FemaleAccepts Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • healthy women age 18-45.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • pregnancy and vertigo

Sites / Locations

    Arms of the Study

    Arm 1

    Arm 2

    Arm Type

    Experimental

    No Intervention

    Arm Label

    Weighted waist-hooping

    Control

    Arm Description

    Participants weighted waist-hooping on their own for ten minutes a day, four days a week, for six weeks resulting in a total of 40 minutes of weighted waist-hooping each week. Participants weighted waist-hooped with a three-pound weighted hula hoop at the waist for ten minutes. Half time hooping to the left and the other half hooping to the right. If discomfort while hooping occurred participants were instructed to take breaks, change directions more frequently, or where thicker clothing to lessen the impact of the hoop around their waists. The investigators would check in on the participants weekly to provide feedback on technique and answer all questions throughout the six-week intervention.

    No Intervention

    Outcomes

    Primary Outcome Measures

    Balance Error Scoring System (BESS)
    Participants were instructed to maintain each of the 6 positions for as long as possible and to continue to try until the 20 seconds were complete even if balance was lost, which was counted as an error along with the specific error criteria for this assessment. Total number of errors were recorded for each position according and the summated to provide a total error score. A higher score indicates greater occurrence of error and thus poorer balance.
    Balance Error Scoring System (BESS)
    Participants were instructed to maintain each of the 6 positions for as long as possible and to continue to try until the 20 seconds were complete even if balance was lost, which was counted as an error along with the specific error criteria for this assessment. Total number of errors were recorded for each position according and the summated to provide a total error score. A higher score indicates greater occurrence of error and thus poorer balance.
    Star Excursion Balance Test (SEBT)
    SEBT was conducted for both the right and left leg reaching. Position on the start was used to indicate where to reach. Reaching across the body with the right foot to the left side and reaching across the body with the left foot to the right side were both defined as a medial reach for the purpose of this study.
    Star Excursion Balance Test (SEBT)
    SEBT was conducted for both the right and left leg reaching. Position on the start was used to indicate where to reach. Reaching across the body with the right foot to the left side and reaching across the body with the left foot to the right side were both defined as a medial reach for the purpose of this study.
    equilibrium scores (EQ scores) of the Sensory Organization Test (SOT) on the NeuroCom
    The SOT parses out contributions and functionality of the visual, somatosensory, and vestibular systems provide information regarding the effects of each system on postural control.8 The EQ score is a composite score calculated by the NeuroCom by weighting each of the 6 conditions of typical and altered stimuli. A score closer to 100 indicates less postural sway and a score closer to 0 indicates more postural sway and increased likelihood of fall.8 An increase in EQ score indicates an improvement in postural control and potentially sensory selection since the purpose of the SOT is to determine if patients are able to appropriately reweight their senses in response to the six different conditions in an effort to maintain postural control.
    equilibrium scores (EQ scores) of the Sensory Organization Test (SOT) on the NeuroCom
    The SOT parses out contributions and functionality of the visual, somatosensory, and vestibular systems provide information regarding the effects of each system on postural control.8 The EQ score is a composite score calculated by the NeuroCom by weighting each of the 6 conditions of typical and altered stimuli. A score closer to 100 indicates less postural sway and a score closer to 0 indicates more postural sway and increased likelihood of fall.8 An increase in EQ score indicates an improvement in postural control and potentially sensory selection since the purpose of the SOT is to determine if patients are able to appropriately reweight their senses in response to the six different conditions in an effort to maintain postural control.
    Core Strength position 1
    hold a standard bilateral plank position to assess core strength. The duration of time the participant was able to hold each position was recorded. If the participant was unable to attain proper form or unable to complete the task the duration of hold was recorded as 0 seconds. These assessments were conducted before and after the weighted waist-hooping intervention.
    Core Strength position 1
    hold a standard bilateral plank position to assess core strength. The duration of time the participant was able to hold each position was recorded. If the participant was unable to attain proper form or unable to complete the task the duration of hold was recorded as 0 seconds. These assessments were conducted before and after the weighted waist-hooping intervention.
    Core Strength position 2
    hold a unilateral plank with the dominant leg raised position to assess core strength. The duration of time the participant was able to hold the position was recorded. If the participant was unable to attain proper form or unable to complete the task the duration of hold was recorded as 0 seconds. These assessments were conducted before and after the weighted waist-hooping intervention.
    Core Strength position 2
    hold a unilateral plank with the dominant leg raised position to assess core strength. The duration of time the participant was able to hold the position was recorded. If the participant was unable to attain proper form or unable to complete the task the duration of hold was recorded as 0 seconds. These assessments were conducted before and after the weighted waist-hooping intervention.

    Secondary Outcome Measures

    Full Information

    First Posted
    December 18, 2019
    Last Updated
    December 27, 2019
    Sponsor
    VA Puget Sound Health Care System
    search

    1. Study Identification

    Unique Protocol Identification Number
    NCT04213560
    Brief Title
    The Effects of Weighted Waist-Hooping
    Official Title
    The Effects of Weighted Waist-Hooping on Balance, Proprioception, and Body Awareness
    Study Type
    Interventional

    2. Study Status

    Record Verification Date
    December 2019
    Overall Recruitment Status
    Completed
    Study Start Date
    December 15, 2016 (Actual)
    Primary Completion Date
    December 31, 2018 (Actual)
    Study Completion Date
    December 31, 2018 (Actual)

    3. Sponsor/Collaborators

    Responsible Party, by Official Title
    Principal Investigator
    Name of the Sponsor
    VA Puget Sound Health Care System

    4. Oversight

    Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
    No
    Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
    No
    Data Monitoring Committee
    No

    5. Study Description

    Brief Summary
    Purposes: 1) To determine the effects of weighted waist-hooping on balance in healthy individuals and 2) to observe whether these effects are attributed to neuromuscular conditioning or core strength gains. Methods: 27 females (ages 20-45) were included, 15 in the intervention group, and 12 in the control. The intervention consisted of six weeks of weighted waist-hooping four times a week for 10 minutes each session. Balance was assessed pre and post intervention using the BESS, SEBT, and Neurocom SOT. Core strength was assessed using hold duration of a bilateral and unilateral plank.

    6. Conditions and Keywords

    Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
    Healthy
    Keywords
    Weighted waist-hooping, Balance, Proprioception, Neurocom

    7. Study Design

    Primary Purpose
    Basic Science
    Study Phase
    Not Applicable
    Interventional Study Model
    Parallel Assignment
    Masking
    None (Open Label)
    Allocation
    Non-Randomized
    Enrollment
    27 (Actual)

    8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

    Arm Title
    Weighted waist-hooping
    Arm Type
    Experimental
    Arm Description
    Participants weighted waist-hooping on their own for ten minutes a day, four days a week, for six weeks resulting in a total of 40 minutes of weighted waist-hooping each week. Participants weighted waist-hooped with a three-pound weighted hula hoop at the waist for ten minutes. Half time hooping to the left and the other half hooping to the right. If discomfort while hooping occurred participants were instructed to take breaks, change directions more frequently, or where thicker clothing to lessen the impact of the hoop around their waists. The investigators would check in on the participants weekly to provide feedback on technique and answer all questions throughout the six-week intervention.
    Arm Title
    Control
    Arm Type
    No Intervention
    Arm Description
    No Intervention
    Intervention Type
    Device
    Intervention Name(s)
    weighted waist-hooping
    Intervention Description
    weighted waist-hooping
    Primary Outcome Measure Information:
    Title
    Balance Error Scoring System (BESS)
    Description
    Participants were instructed to maintain each of the 6 positions for as long as possible and to continue to try until the 20 seconds were complete even if balance was lost, which was counted as an error along with the specific error criteria for this assessment. Total number of errors were recorded for each position according and the summated to provide a total error score. A higher score indicates greater occurrence of error and thus poorer balance.
    Time Frame
    baseline
    Title
    Balance Error Scoring System (BESS)
    Description
    Participants were instructed to maintain each of the 6 positions for as long as possible and to continue to try until the 20 seconds were complete even if balance was lost, which was counted as an error along with the specific error criteria for this assessment. Total number of errors were recorded for each position according and the summated to provide a total error score. A higher score indicates greater occurrence of error and thus poorer balance.
    Time Frame
    6 - weeks
    Title
    Star Excursion Balance Test (SEBT)
    Description
    SEBT was conducted for both the right and left leg reaching. Position on the start was used to indicate where to reach. Reaching across the body with the right foot to the left side and reaching across the body with the left foot to the right side were both defined as a medial reach for the purpose of this study.
    Time Frame
    baseline
    Title
    Star Excursion Balance Test (SEBT)
    Description
    SEBT was conducted for both the right and left leg reaching. Position on the start was used to indicate where to reach. Reaching across the body with the right foot to the left side and reaching across the body with the left foot to the right side were both defined as a medial reach for the purpose of this study.
    Time Frame
    6 - weeks
    Title
    equilibrium scores (EQ scores) of the Sensory Organization Test (SOT) on the NeuroCom
    Description
    The SOT parses out contributions and functionality of the visual, somatosensory, and vestibular systems provide information regarding the effects of each system on postural control.8 The EQ score is a composite score calculated by the NeuroCom by weighting each of the 6 conditions of typical and altered stimuli. A score closer to 100 indicates less postural sway and a score closer to 0 indicates more postural sway and increased likelihood of fall.8 An increase in EQ score indicates an improvement in postural control and potentially sensory selection since the purpose of the SOT is to determine if patients are able to appropriately reweight their senses in response to the six different conditions in an effort to maintain postural control.
    Time Frame
    baseline
    Title
    equilibrium scores (EQ scores) of the Sensory Organization Test (SOT) on the NeuroCom
    Description
    The SOT parses out contributions and functionality of the visual, somatosensory, and vestibular systems provide information regarding the effects of each system on postural control.8 The EQ score is a composite score calculated by the NeuroCom by weighting each of the 6 conditions of typical and altered stimuli. A score closer to 100 indicates less postural sway and a score closer to 0 indicates more postural sway and increased likelihood of fall.8 An increase in EQ score indicates an improvement in postural control and potentially sensory selection since the purpose of the SOT is to determine if patients are able to appropriately reweight their senses in response to the six different conditions in an effort to maintain postural control.
    Time Frame
    6 - weeks
    Title
    Core Strength position 1
    Description
    hold a standard bilateral plank position to assess core strength. The duration of time the participant was able to hold each position was recorded. If the participant was unable to attain proper form or unable to complete the task the duration of hold was recorded as 0 seconds. These assessments were conducted before and after the weighted waist-hooping intervention.
    Time Frame
    baseline
    Title
    Core Strength position 1
    Description
    hold a standard bilateral plank position to assess core strength. The duration of time the participant was able to hold each position was recorded. If the participant was unable to attain proper form or unable to complete the task the duration of hold was recorded as 0 seconds. These assessments were conducted before and after the weighted waist-hooping intervention.
    Time Frame
    6 - weeks
    Title
    Core Strength position 2
    Description
    hold a unilateral plank with the dominant leg raised position to assess core strength. The duration of time the participant was able to hold the position was recorded. If the participant was unable to attain proper form or unable to complete the task the duration of hold was recorded as 0 seconds. These assessments were conducted before and after the weighted waist-hooping intervention.
    Time Frame
    baseline
    Title
    Core Strength position 2
    Description
    hold a unilateral plank with the dominant leg raised position to assess core strength. The duration of time the participant was able to hold the position was recorded. If the participant was unable to attain proper form or unable to complete the task the duration of hold was recorded as 0 seconds. These assessments were conducted before and after the weighted waist-hooping intervention.
    Time Frame
    6 - weeks

    10. Eligibility

    Sex
    Female
    Minimum Age & Unit of Time
    18 Years
    Maximum Age & Unit of Time
    45 Years
    Accepts Healthy Volunteers
    Accepts Healthy Volunteers
    Eligibility Criteria
    Inclusion Criteria: healthy women age 18-45. Exclusion Criteria: pregnancy and vertigo

    12. IPD Sharing Statement

    Plan to Share IPD
    No

    Learn more about this trial

    The Effects of Weighted Waist-Hooping

    We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs