Rehabilitation for chronic ankle instability with or without destabilization devices: A randomized controlled trial

62Citations
Citations of this article
369Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Context: Individuals with chronic ankle instability (CAI) have deficits in neuromuscular control and altered movement patterns. Ankle-destabilization devices have been shown to increase lower extremity muscle activity during functional tasks and may be useful tools for improving common deficits and selfreported function. Objective: To determine whether a 4-week rehabilitation program that includes destabilization devices has greater effects on self-reported function, range of motion (ROM), strength, and balance than rehabilitation without devices in patients with CAI. Design: Randomized controlled clinical trial. Setting: Laboratory. Patients or Other Participants: A total of 26 patients with CAI (7 men, 19 women; age = 21.34 ± 3.06 years, height = 168.96 ± 8.77 cm, mass = 70.73 ± 13.86 kg). Intervention(s): Patients completed baseline measures and were randomized into no-device and device groups. Both groups completed 4 weeks of supervised, impairment-based progressive rehabilitation with or without devices and then repeated baseline measures. Main Outcome Measure(s): We assessed self-reported function using the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure. Ankle ROM was measured with an inclinometer. Ankle strength was assessed using a handheld dynamometer during maximal voluntary isometric contractions. Balance was measured using a composite score of 3 reach directions from the Star Excursion Balance Test and a force plate to calculate center of pressure during eyes-open and eyes-closed single-limb balance. We compared each dependent variable using a 2×2 (group × time) analysis of variance and post hoc tests as appropriate and set an a priori α level at .05. The Hedges g effect sizes and associated 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Results: We observed no differences between the nodevice and device groups for any measure. However, both groups had large improvements in self-reported function and ankle strength. Conclusions: Incorporating destabilization devices into rehabilitation did not improve ankle function more effectively than traditional rehabilitation tools because both interventions resulted in similar improvements. Impairment-based progressive rehabilitation improved clinical outcomes associated with CAI.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Donovan, L., Hart, J. M., Saliba, S. A., Park, J., Feger, M. A., Herb, C. S., & Hertel, J. (2016). Rehabilitation for chronic ankle instability with or without destabilization devices: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Athletic Training, 51(3), 233–251. https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-6050-51.3.09

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free