Assessing Standing Balance Using Balance Rehabilitation Unit and Nintendo Wii Balance Board in Young and Older Healthy Adults

Background

Age-related changes in the body’s balance mechanisms represent a major contributor to falls among older adults — a leading cause of injury-related morbidity and mortality in the geriatric population. The gold standard for balance assessment is computerised posturography, which measures centre of pressure (COP) displacement during quiet standing. However, the high cost of clinical posturography equipment (typically tens of thousands of dollars) limits its availability to specialised rehabilitation centres, leaving most primary care settings and community health programmes without access to objective balance measurement tools.

The Nintendo Wii Balance Board (WBB), originally designed as a gaming peripheral, has attracted research interest as a potential low-cost posturography alternative. Priced at a fraction of clinical equipment and easily portable, the WBB contains four load sensors capable of detecting shifts in COP. This study compared the balance measures obtained from the WBB with those from the Balance Rehabilitation Unit (BRU™), an established clinical posturography system, across different age groups and testing conditions.

Study Design and Participants

Sixty-six healthy volunteers participated: 33 young adults (mean age 26.9 ± 5.6 years) and 33 older adults (mean age 65.6 ± 4.4 years). Participants were randomly assigned to be tested on both devices. Each person performed 30-second trials under four standardised conditions: (1) quiet standing on a firm surface with eyes open, (2) firm surface with eyes closed, (3) compliant surface (foam) with eyes open, and (4) foam surface with eyes closed. These conditions systematically manipulate visual and somatosensory inputs to challenge different components of the balance control system.

Age-Related Differences

Both the BRU™ and WBB detected significant age-related differences in postural stability. Older adults demonstrated greater COP displacement (increased sway) compared with younger adults across all testing conditions, consistent with the well-established literature on age-related decline in balance function. The most challenging condition — standing on foam with eyes closed, which eliminates both visual and reliable somatosensory inputs — produced the largest between-group differences and the greatest sway magnitudes in both age groups.

Clinical Utility of the Wii Balance Board

The WBB showed promise as a clinically useful screening tool. Its portability means it can be deployed in community health centres, primary care clinics, and even patients’ homes. The device requires minimal technical expertise to operate and can provide immediate visual feedback about balance performance. Studies from other centres have confirmed the WBB’s reliability, with within-device intraclass correlation coefficients ranging from 0.66 to 0.94 compared with laboratory-grade force platforms.

However, important caveats exist. The WBB’s sampling rate and measurement precision are lower than those of clinical posturography systems. For detailed clinical assessment of vestibular or neurological balance disorders, the BRU™ or equivalent systems remain necessary. The WBB is best suited for screening purposes, population-level assessments, and monitoring balance changes over time in community settings.

Implications for Fall Prevention

Falls represent a substantial healthcare burden across Southeast Asia. Malaysia’s ageing population will require scalable, affordable tools for identifying older adults at risk of falling. The WBB’s accessibility makes it a candidate for integration into community-based fall prevention programmes, where it could serve as both an assessment tool and an interactive balance training device through exergame applications.

Limitations

The study included only healthy adults and excluded those with known balance disorders or neurological conditions. The generalisability of comparisons between the WBB and BRU™ to clinical populations (such as stroke survivors or Parkinson’s disease patients) requires further investigation. The cross-sectional design does not address the WBB’s sensitivity to changes in balance over time or in response to intervention. Standardised protocols and normative values for WBB-based assessments have not yet been established, limiting clinical decision-making based on WBB data.

← Back to MJPHM Homepage