University of Primorska, Faculty of Health Sciences, Polje 42, SI-6310, Izola, Slovenia; University of Primorska, Andrej Marušič Institute, Muzejski trg 2, SI-6000, Koper, Slovenia.
University of Niš, Faculty of Sport and Physical Education, Čarnojevićeva 10a, 18000, Niš, Serbia.
Gait Posture. 2021 May;86:205-210. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2021.03.022. Epub 2021 Mar 18.
The role of the measurements of postural stability in the context of screening for ankle sprain risk is still equivocal. Transient characteristics of body sway have been suggested as an alternative or an improvement to traditional whole-trial analyses.
Are transient characteristics of body sway sensitive to the history of ankle sprain?.
The assessment of 30-s single-leg body sway was performed on a group of 93 athletes from basketball, soccer, tennis and running who reported at least 1 ankle sprain in the last 12 months, while a group of 244 athletes from the same disciplines served as a control group without an ankle sprain reported for the same time period. We considered the mean center-of-pressure (CoP) velocity, CoP amplitude and CoP frequency. In addition to traditional whole-trial variables, we calculated the relative differences between the 1 st and the 2nd (DIF_21) and 1 st and 3rd (DIF_31) 10-s time intervals within the whole trial.
The indexes of transient characteristics of body sway (i.e., the DIF_21 and DIF_31) were in trivial or weak correlations with whole-trial variables (all r ≤ 0.29). Athletes with ankle sprain history exhibited smaller CoP ML velocity (p = 0.002) and larger CoP ML frequency (p = 0.001). In the injured group, the injured leg exhibited lower total and medial-lateral (ML) CoP velocity (p = 0.005-0.040), as well as lower CoP ML amplitude (p = 0.002) and higher CoP ML frequency (p = 0.010). The transient characteristics of body sway (DIF_21 and DIF_31) were very similar between the groups and between the injured and uninjured legs.
Transient characteristics of body sway do not appear to differentiate the athletes with and without a history of ankle sprain. Further research is needed to confirm if the transient characteristics of body sway could be used for detection of risk of falls in older adults or assessment of athletic performance.
在踝关节扭伤风险筛查中,姿势稳定性测量的作用仍存在争议。身体摆动的瞬态特征已被提议作为传统全试验分析的替代或改进。
身体摆动的瞬态特征是否对踝关节扭伤史敏感?
对来自篮球、足球、网球和跑步的 93 名运动员进行了 30 秒单腿身体摆动评估,这些运动员在过去 12 个月内至少报告了 1 次踝关节扭伤,而来自同一运动项目的 244 名无踝关节扭伤报告的运动员作为对照组在同一时期。我们考虑了平均中心压力(CoP)速度、CoP 幅度和 CoP 频率。除了传统的全试验变量外,我们还计算了整个试验中第 1 秒和第 2 秒(DIF_21)以及第 1 秒和第 3 秒(DIF_31)之间的 10 秒时间间隔的相对差异。
身体摆动的瞬态特征指标(即 DIF_21 和 DIF_31)与全试验变量呈轻微或弱相关(所有 r≤0.29)。有踝关节扭伤史的运动员的 CoP ML 速度较小(p=0.002),CoP ML 频率较大(p=0.001)。在受伤组中,受伤腿的总和内外侧(ML)CoP 速度较低(p=0.005-0.040),CoP ML 幅度较低(p=0.002),CoP ML 频率较高(p=0.010)。两组之间以及受伤和未受伤腿之间的身体摆动瞬态特征(DIF_21 和 DIF_31)非常相似。
身体摆动的瞬态特征似乎无法区分有和无踝关节扭伤史的运动员。需要进一步研究以确认身体摆动的瞬态特征是否可用于检测老年人跌倒的风险或评估运动表现。