Physical therapy in sport : official journal of the Association of Chartered Physiotherapists in Sports Medicine · 2009
Bracing does not improve dynamic stability in chronic ankle instability subjects.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gribble Phillip A, Taylor Brittany L, Shinohara Junji
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effects of an ankle brace on dynamic postural stability, measured with Time to Stabilization (TTS), in subjects with chronic ankle instability (CAI).
DESIGN: Two-within (Condition, Side) repeated measures.
SETTING: Research laboratory.
PARTICIPANTS: Fifteen subjects with unilateral CAI.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Subjects participated in two testing sessions during which a single-limb jump-landing task was performed with one of two conditions: lace-up ankle brace or no ankle brace. Ground reaction forces were used to calculate Resultant Vector TTS (RVTTS).
RESULTS: For RVTTS, there were no statistically significant main effects for Side (F(1,14) = 1.005; p = 0.33) or Condition (F(1,14) = 2.48; p = 0.14), as well as no significant interaction effect (F(1,14) = 1.67; p = 0.22).
CONCLUSION: While TTS is a useful outcome tool for identifying deficits in subjects with CAI and improvements related to ankle rehabilitation, this measure of dynamic stability does not appear to be sensitive in detecting the influence of the application of an ankle brace in this pathological group. Researchers need to establish what other testing methods will be the best for determining the outcome of the application of an ankle brace in the laboratory setting to coincide with the epidemiology data that support the use of these devices.
DESIGN: Two-within (Condition, Side) repeated measures.
SETTING: Research laboratory.
PARTICIPANTS: Fifteen subjects with unilateral CAI.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Subjects participated in two testing sessions during which a single-limb jump-landing task was performed with one of two conditions: lace-up ankle brace or no ankle brace. Ground reaction forces were used to calculate Resultant Vector TTS (RVTTS).
RESULTS: For RVTTS, there were no statistically significant main effects for Side (F(1,14) = 1.005; p = 0.33) or Condition (F(1,14) = 2.48; p = 0.14), as well as no significant interaction effect (F(1,14) = 1.67; p = 0.22).
CONCLUSION: While TTS is a useful outcome tool for identifying deficits in subjects with CAI and improvements related to ankle rehabilitation, this measure of dynamic stability does not appear to be sensitive in detecting the influence of the application of an ankle brace in this pathological group. Researchers need to establish what other testing methods will be the best for determining the outcome of the application of an ankle brace in the laboratory setting to coincide with the epidemiology data that support the use of these devices.