Position-specific deficit of joint position sense in ankles with chronic functional instability

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Nagasaki University , Nagasaki, Japan.
Journal of sports science & medicine (Impact Factor: 1.03). 12/2008; 7(4):480-5.
Source: PubMed


The present study was aimed to test a hypothesis that individuals with functional ankle instability (FAI) underestimate the joint angle at greater plantarflexion and inversion. Seventeen males with unilateral FAI and 17 controls (males without FAI) consented for participation in this IRB-approved, case-control study. Using a passive reproduction test, we assessed ankle joint position sense (JPS) for test positions between 30 and -10 degrees plantarflexion with an inclement of 10 degrees with or without 20° inversion at each plantarflexion angle. The constant error (CE) was defined as the value obtained by subtracting the true angle of a test position from the corresponding perceived angle. At plantarflexed and inverted test positions, the CE values were smaller in negative with greater in the FAI group than in the control group. That is, in the FAI group, the FAI group underestimated the true plantarflexion angle at combined 30° plantarflexion and 20° inversion. We conclude that the ankle with FAI underestimate the amount of plantarflexion, which increases the chance of reaching greater planterflexion and inversion than patients' intention at high risk situations of spraining such as landing. Key pointsJoint position sense (JPS) of the ankle with functional ankle instability was investigated utilizing a passive reproduction test.The FAI group demonstrated greater error of the joint position than the control group only when the ankle was positioned at combined inversion and plantarflexion.The FAI group underestimated plantarflexion angle when the ankle was placed at combined inversion and plantarflexion.

Download full-text


Available from: Kazuyoshi Gamada,
  • Source
    • "Motor control has several components, incorporating posture and muscle activation patterns, as well as requiring normal processing of sensory inputs such as proprioception. Proprioception has been investigated in peripheral musculoskeletal disorders (Machner et al., 2003; Thijs et al., 2007; Yokoyama et al., 2008), as well as more recently in both cervical (Sterling et al., 2003; Treleaven et al., 2006; Lark and McCarthy, 2007) and lumbar (Lam et al., 1999; Newcomer et al., 2000b; O'Sullivan et al., 2003) disorders . There is some evidence that patients with NSCLBP have Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Studies examining repositioning error (RE) in non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP) demonstrate contradictory results, with most studies not correlating RE deficits with measures of pain, disability or fear. This study examined if RE deficits exist among a subgroup of patients with NSCLBP whose symptoms are provoked by flexion, and how such deficits relate to measures of pain, disability, fear-avoidance and kinesiophobia. 15 patients with NSCLBP were matched (age, gender, and body mass index) with 15 painfree participants. Lumbo-pelvic RE, pain, functional disability, fear-avoidance and kinesiophobia were evaluated. Participants were asked to reproduce a target position (neutral lumbo-pelvic posture) after 5 s of slump sitting. RE in each group was compared by evaluating constant error (CE), absolute error (AE) and variable error (VE). Both AE (p = 0.002) and CE (p = 0.006) were significantly larger in the NSCLBP group, unlike VE (p = 0.165) which did not differ between the groups. There were significant, moderate correlations in the NSCLBP group between AE and functional disability (r = 0.601, p = 0.018), and between CE and fear-avoidance (r = -0.577, p = 0.0024), but all other correlations were weak (r < 0.337, rs < 0.377) or non-significant (p > 0.05). The results demonstrate increased lumbo-pelvic RE in a subgroup of NSCLBP patients, with the selected subgroup undershooting the target position. Overall, RE was only weakly to moderately correlated with measures of pain, disability or fear. The deficits observed are consistent with findings of altered motor control in patients with NSCLBP. The mechanisms underlying these RE deficits, and the most effective method of addressing these deficits, require further study.
    Manual therapy 06/2013; 18(6). DOI:10.1016/j.math.2013.05.005 · 1.71 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The main aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that the VibramFivefingers model, with its minimal structure, cushioning and finger separation, allows a more accurate estimate of static and dynamic foot position compared to wearing a standard cushioned running shoe. Static ankle joint position sense was assessed in the sagittal and frontal plane by asking fourteen healthy experienced amateur runners to estimate the perceived direction and amplitude of a support slope surface board placed under their right foot while standing. The dynamic measures were performed with the subjects running on a treadmill at 12 km/h and asking them to evaluate the treadmill surface slope. Two footwear (Fivefingers and a cushioned protective running shoe) and the barefoot condition were compared. Plantarflexion, dorsiflexion, eversion and inversion movements were underestimated in all the experimental conditions. In the static trials there was significantly more angle error underestimation (P<0.05) with the running shoe, while no significant differences were found between Fivefingers and barefoot condition. While running, the treadmill surface slope was significantly better estimated with Fivefingers than in the other two conditions (P<0.05). The data support the assumption that with Fivefingers is more likely to get a more correct estimation of the surface slope while standing and running compared to using a standard cushioned running shoe. The finding that the cushioned shoes significantly impair foot position awareness compared to less structured shoes is consistent with the results of some previous studies on healthy and unhealthy subjects.
    The Journal of sports medicine and physical fitness 09/2011; 51(3):401-8. · 0.97 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To identify the most precise and consistent variables using joint repositioning for identifying joint position recognition (JPR) deficits in individuals with chronic ankle instability (CAI). We conducted a computerized search of the relevant scientific literature from January 1, 1965, to July 31, 2010, using PubMed Central, CINAHL, MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science. We also conducted hand searches of all retrieved studies to identify relevant citations. Included studies were written in English, involved human participants, and were published in peer-reviewed journals. Studies were included in the analysis if the authors (1) had examined JPR deficits in patients with CAI using active or passive repositioning techniques, (2) had made comparisons with a group or contralateral limb without CAI, and (3) had provided means and standard deviations for the calculation of effect sizes. Studies were selected and coded independently and assessed for quality by the investigators. We evaluated 6 JPR variables: (1) study comparisons, (2) starting foot position, (3) repositioning method, (4) testing range of motion, (5) testing velocity, and (6) data-reduction method. The independent variable was group (CAI, control group or side without CAI). The dependent variable was errors committed during joint repositioning. Means and standard deviations for errors committed were extracted from each included study. Effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals were calculated to make comparisons across studies. Separate meta-analyses were calculated to determine the most precise and consistent method within each variable. Between-groups comparisons that involved active repositioning starting from a neutral position and moving into plantar flexion or inversion at a rate of less than 5°/s as measured by the mean absolute error committed appeared to be the most sensitive and precise variables for detecting JPR deficits in people with CAI.
    Journal of athletic training 08/2012; 47(4):444-56. DOI:10.4085/1062-6050-47.4.15 · 2.02 Impact Factor
Show more