School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medicine, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.
Department of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Allied Health Sciences, University of Peradeniya, Kandy, Sri Lanka.
J Man Manip Ther. 2021 Jun;29(3):168-175. doi: 10.1080/10669817.2020.1844852. Epub 2020 Nov 13.
: Clinically, a discrepancy of fibular position in relation to the tibia has been proposed as a factor in the persistence of chronic ankle instability (CAI). Previous studies have produced conflicting findings, perhaps due to varying radiological methods and measurement of participants in non-weight-bearing positions.: To compare normalized-fibular position in weight-bearing in individuals with CAI with healthy controls.: A weight-bearing lateral X-ray was taken of the affected ankle of 33 adults with CAI and 33 matched controls. The distance between the anterior edges of the distal fibula and tibia was recorded, and then normalized as a proportion of maximal tibial width. Normalized-fibular position was compared between groups using independent t-tests. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to determine reliability of measurements. A receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to determine sensitivity, specificity, and a cutoff score to differentiate individuals with CAI from controls using normalized-fibular position.: Normalized fibular position was significantly different (CAI, 29.7 (6.6)%; healthy, 26.7 (4.8)%) between the groups. Measurement of intra-rater (0.99, 95%CI = 0.98 to 1.00) and inter-rater (0.98, 95%CI = 0.96 to 0.99) reliability were both excellent. The threshold normalized-fibular position was 27%, with a score more than 27% indicating a greater chance of being in the CAI group. Sensitivity was 69.7% and specificity was 54.5% for this threshold.: A slightly anteriorly positioned fibula in relation to the tibia was observed in people with CAI. Specificity/sensitivity scores for normalized-fibular position indicate that it has little ability to predict CAI alone.
临床上,腓骨相对于胫骨的位置差异被认为是慢性踝关节不稳定(CAI)持续存在的一个因素。先前的研究得出了相互矛盾的结果,这可能是由于不同的影像学方法和对非负重位参与者的测量所致。
比较 CAI 患者与健康对照组在负重状态下腓骨的归一化位置。
对 33 名 CAI 患者和 33 名匹配的对照组的患侧踝关节进行负重侧位 X 线检查。记录腓骨远端前缘与胫骨前缘之间的距离,然后归一化为胫骨最大宽度的比例。使用独立 t 检验比较组间归一化腓骨位置。计算组内相关系数(ICC)以确定测量的可靠性。使用受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线确定使用归一化腓骨位置区分 CAI 患者和对照组的敏感性、特异性和截断分数。
组间归一化腓骨位置差异有统计学意义(CAI 组 29.7(6.6)%;健康对照组 26.7(4.8)%)。内评分者(0.99,95%CI=0.98 至 1.00)和间评分者(0.98,95%CI=0.96 至 0.99)的测量可靠性均极好。归一化腓骨位置的阈值为 27%,得分高于 27%表明更有可能处于 CAI 组。该阈值的敏感性为 69.7%,特异性为 54.5%。
在 CAI 患者中,观察到腓骨相对于胫骨的位置略微靠前。归一化腓骨位置的特异性/敏感性评分表明,它单独预测 CAI 的能力有限。