Suppr超能文献

使用或不使用稳定装置治疗慢性踝关节不稳:一项随机对照试验

Rehabilitation for Chronic Ankle Instability With or Without Destabilization Devices: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

作者信息

Donovan Luke, Hart Joseph M, Saliba Susan A, Park Joseph, Feger Mark Anthony, Herb Christopher C, Hertel Jay

机构信息

Department of Kinesiology, University of Toledo, OH; Departments of.

Kinesiology and.

出版信息

J Athl Train. 2016 Mar;51(3):233-51. doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-51.3.09. Epub 2016 Mar 2.

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 self-reported 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 no-device 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.

摘要

背景

慢性踝关节不稳(CAI)患者存在神经肌肉控制缺陷和运动模式改变。踝关节失稳装置已被证明可在功能任务期间增加下肢肌肉活动,可能是改善常见缺陷和自我报告功能的有用工具。

目的

确定与不使用装置的康复相比,包含失稳装置的4周康复计划对CAI患者的自我报告功能、活动范围(ROM)、力量和平衡是否有更大影响。

设计

随机对照临床试验。

地点

实验室。

患者或其他参与者

共26例CAI患者(7例男性,19例女性;年龄=21.34±3.06岁,身高=168.96±8.77cm,体重=70.73±13.86kg)。

干预措施

患者完成基线测量,然后随机分为无装置组和装置组。两组均完成4周有监督的、基于损伤的渐进性康复,一组使用装置,另一组不使用,之后重复基线测量。

主要结局指标

我们使用足踝能力测量量表评估自我报告功能。使用倾角计测量踝关节活动范围。在最大自主等长收缩期间,使用手持测力计评估踝关节力量。使用来自星形偏移平衡测试的3个伸展方向的综合评分和测力板来测量平衡,以计算睁眼和闭眼单腿平衡期间的压力中心。我们使用2×2(组×时间)方差分析和适当的事后检验比较每个因变量,并将先验α水平设定为0.05。计算了Hedges g效应量和相关的95%置信区间。

结果

我们观察到无装置组和装置组在任何测量指标上均无差异。然而,两组在自我报告功能和踝关节力量方面均有大幅改善。

结论

将失稳装置纳入康复治疗并不比传统康复工具更有效地改善踝关节功能,因为两种干预措施带来的改善相似。基于损伤的渐进性康复改善了与CAI相关的临床结局。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

9
Foot clearance in walking and running in individuals with ankle instability.踝关节不稳定患者行走和跑步时的足廓清。
Am J Sports Med. 2011 Aug;39(8):1769-76. doi: 10.1177/0363546511408872. Epub 2011 Jun 17.
10
The epidemiology of ankle sprains in the United States.美国踝关节扭伤的流行病学。
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010 Oct 6;92(13):2279-84. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.I.01537.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验