Department of Applied Medicine and Rehabilitation, Indiana State University, Terre Haute. Dr Gaven is now with the College of Health Sciences, University of Indianapolis, IN.
J Athl Train. 2019 Apr;54(4):403-417. doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-380-17. Epub 2019 Mar 14.
To conduct a systematic review with meta-analysis assessing the effectiveness of joint mobilizations for improving dorsiflexion range of motion (DFROM) and dynamic postural control in individuals with chronic ankle instability.
Electronic databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus) were searched from inception to January 2017.
Included studies examined the isolated effects of joint mobilizations to enhance DFROM and dynamic postural control in individuals with chronic ankle instability and provided adequate data to calculate effect sizes (ESs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
Two investigators independently assessed the methodologic quality, level of evidence, and strength of recommendation using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale and the Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy. We extracted the sample sizes, means, and standard deviations for DFROM and dynamic postural control and filtered the data based on control-to-intervention and preintervention-to-postintervention (pre-post) comparisons.
We included 7 level 1 and 3 level 2 studies that had a median Physiotherapy Evidence Database score of 60% (range = 40%-80%). The magnitudes of control-to-intervention and pre-post differences were examined using bias-corrected Hedges ESs. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted for each outcome measure and comparison. Positive ESs indicated better outcome scores in the intervention group than in the control group and at postintervention than at preintervention. The α level was set at .05. Meta-analysis revealed weak and moderate ESs for overall control-to-intervention (ES = 0.41; 95% CI = 0.14, 0.68; = .003) and pre-post (ES = 0.34; 95% CI = 0.20, 0.48; < .001) DFROM analyses. Overall, dynamic postural control meta-analysis revealed moderate control-to-intervention (ES = 0.42; 95% CI = -0.14, 0.98; = .14) and weak and moderate ESs for pre-post (ES = 0.37; 95% CI = -0.12, 0.87; = .14) analyses.
We observed grade A evidence that joint mobilizations can mildly improve DFROM among individuals with chronic ankle instability compared with controls and preintervention. We observed grade B evidence that indicated conflicting effects of joint mobilizations on dynamic postural control compared with controls and preintervention.
进行系统评价和荟萃分析,评估关节松动术对改善慢性踝关节不稳定患者背屈活动度(DFROM)和动态姿势控制的效果。
从创建到 2017 年 1 月,电子数据库(PubMed、MEDLINE、CINAHL 和 SPORTDiscus)进行了搜索。
纳入的研究单独评估了关节松动术对慢性踝关节不稳定患者背屈活动度和动态姿势控制的增强作用,并提供了足够的数据来计算效应量(ES)和 95%置信区间(CI)。
两名研究人员使用物理治疗证据数据库量表和推荐强度分类法独立评估方法学质量、证据水平和推荐强度。我们提取了 DFROM 和动态姿势控制的样本量、均值和标准差,并根据对照干预和干预前-干预后(预-后)比较对数据进行了过滤。
我们纳入了 7 项 1 级和 3 项 2 级研究,这些研究的物理治疗证据数据库评分中位数为 60%(范围=40%-80%)。使用偏倚校正的 Hedges ES 检查了对照干预和预-后差异的大小。对每个结果测量和比较进行了随机效应荟萃分析。阳性 ES 表示干预组的结果评分优于对照组和干预后优于干预前。α 水平设定为.05。荟萃分析显示,在总体对照干预(ES=0.41;95%CI=0.14,0.68; =.003)和预-后(ES=0.34;95%CI=0.20,0.48; <.001)DFROM 分析中,ES 为弱和中度。总体而言,动态姿势控制荟萃分析显示,在对照干预(ES=0.42;95%CI=-0.14,0.98; =.14)和预-后(ES=0.37;95%CI=-0.12,0.87; =.14)分析中,ES 为弱和中度。
我们观察到 A 级证据表明,与对照组和干预前相比,关节松动术可轻度改善慢性踝关节不稳定患者的 DFROM。我们观察到 B 级证据表明,与对照组和干预前相比,关节松动术对动态姿势控制的影响存在矛盾。