Greene T A, Hillman S K
Department of Intercollegiate Athletics, University of Arizona, Tucson.
Am J Sports Med. 1990 Sep-Oct;18(5):498-506. doi: 10.1177/036354659001800509.
The purpose of this study was to compare the relative effectiveness of athletic taping and a semirigid orthosis in providing inversion-eversion range restriction before, during, and after a 3 hour volleyball practice. The effect of each support method on the subjects' vertical jumping ability was also assessed. Fourteen ankles were treated with both methods of support. Passive inversion-eversion range of motion was measured on an ankle stability test instrument during five testing sessions: 1) before support, 2) before exercise, 3) 20 minutes during exercise, 4) 60 minutes during exercise, and 5) after exercise. The two-way analysis of variance and posthoc comparisons revealed maximal losses in taping restriction for both inversion and eversion at 20 minutes into exercise. The orthosis demonstrated no mechanical restrictive failure until before and after exercise comparisons were made, and then only eversion range of motion was compromised. Neither support system affected subjects' vertical jumping ability. These results suggest that the semirigid orthosis may be more effective than taping in providing initial ankle protection and in guarding against ligamentous reinjury.
本研究的目的是比较运动贴扎和半刚性矫形器在3小时排球训练前、训练期间和训练后提供内翻-外翻活动范围限制方面的相对有效性。还评估了每种支撑方法对受试者垂直跳跃能力的影响。14个踝关节接受了两种支撑方法的治疗。在五次测试期间,使用踝关节稳定性测试仪器测量被动内翻-外翻活动范围:1)支撑前,2)运动前,3)运动期间20分钟,4)运动期间60分钟,以及5)运动后。双向方差分析和事后比较显示,运动20分钟时,贴扎限制在内翻和外翻方面均出现最大程度的丧失。在进行运动前后比较之前,矫形器未出现机械性限制失效情况,而之后只有外翻活动范围受到影响。两种支撑系统均未影响受试者的垂直跳跃能力。这些结果表明,在提供初始踝关节保护和防止韧带再次损伤方面,半刚性矫形器可能比贴扎更有效。