Postural control differs between those with and without chronic ankle instability

Biodynamics Research Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, NC 28223,United States.
Gait & posture (Impact Factor: 2.3). 04/2010; 32(1):82-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2010.03.015
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Despite a history of a lateral ankle sprain, some individuals (copers) return to high-level activities (i.e. jumping, pivoting) without recurrent injury or loss of function while others develop chronic ankle instability (CAI). Understanding the differences between these groups may provide insight into the mechanisms of CAI. The objectives of this investigation were to: (1) compare traditional center of pressure [COP], time-to-boundary [TTB], and center of pressure-center of mass [COP-COM] moment arm measures of postural control among controls, established copers, and subjects with CAI and (2) determine the accuracy of these postural control measures at discriminating between established copers and subjects with CAI using receiving operating characteristic curves. 48 subjects (control=16, coper=16, CAI=16) completed two, 30-s trials of single-leg stance on a force plate with their eyes open. Coper and CAI subjects stood on their involved limb while controls stood on a matched limb. The results indicated that mediolateral (p<0.01) and anteroposterior (p<0.01) COP velocity was greater in individuals with CAI relative to both copers and controls. Similarly, the peak COP-COM moment arm in the anteroposterior direction (p<0.01) and the resultant mean COP-COM moment arm (p<0.01) were increased in individuals with CAI relative to copers. These measures also reached asymptotic significance (p<0.05) indicating that they successfully discriminated between established copers and individuals with CAI.

Download full-text


Available from: Erik A Wikstrom, Jul 01, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Longitudinal analyses of participants with a history of lateral ankle sprain are lacking. This investigation combined measures of inter-joint coordination and stabilometry to evaluate eyes-open (condition 1) and eyes-closed (condition 2) static unilateral stance performance in a group of participants, 6-months after they sustained an acute, first-time lateral ankle sprain in comparison to a control group. Sixty-nine participants with a 6-month history of first-time lateral ankle sprain and 20 non-injured controls completed three 20-second unilateral stance task trials in conditions 1 and 2. An adjusted coefficient of multiple determination statistic was used to compare stance limb 3-dimensional kinematic data for similarity in the aim of establishing patterns of lower-limb inter-joint coordination. The fractal dimension of the stance limb centre of pressure path was also calculated. Between-group analyses revealed significant differences in stance limb inter-joint coordination strategies for conditions 1 and 2, and in the fractal dimension of the centre-of-pressure path for condition 2 only. Injured participants displayed increases in ankle-hip linked coordination compared to controls in condition 1 (sagittal/frontal plane: 0.15 [0.14] vs 0.06 [0.04]; η(2)=.19; sagittal/transverse plane: 0.14 [0.11] vs 0.09 [0.05]; η(2)=0.14) and condition 2 (sagittal/frontal plane: 0.15 [0.12] vs 0.08 [0.06]; η(2)=0.23), with an associated decrease in the fractal dimension of the centre-of-pressure path (injured limb: 1.23 [0.13] vs 1.36 [0.13]; η(2)=0.20). Participants with a 6-month history of first-time lateral ankle sprain exhibit a hip-dominant coordination strategy for static unilateral stance compared to non-injured controls. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
    Clinical biomechanics (Bristol, Avon) 12/2014; 30(2). DOI:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2014.12.011 · 1.88 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Motor control evaluation in subjects with functional ankle instability is questionable when both ankles of the same subject are compared (affected vs non-affected). To compare the postural control and reaction time of ankle muscles among: basketball players with FAI (instability group), basketball players without FAI (non-instability group) and healthy non-basketball-playing participants (control group). Case-control study. Laboratory. Instability (n = 10), non-instability (n = 10), and control groups (n = 11). Centre of pressure variables (area, velocity and sway) were measured with a force platform. Reaction time of ankle muscles was measured via electromyography. A one-way ANOVA demonstrated that there were significant differences between the instability and non-instability groups in the fibularis longus (p < 0.001), fibularis brevis (p = 0.031) and tibialis anterior (p = 0.049) muscles. Repeated-measures ANOVA and post hoc analysis determined significant differences for the area between the instability and non-instability groups (p = 0.001). Basketball players with FAI have reduced postural control and longer reaction time of the fibularis and tibialis anterior muscles. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
    Physical Therapy in Sport 11/2014; DOI:10.1016/j.ptsp.2014.10.008 · 1.37 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In research regarding postural stability, leg preference is often tested and controlled for. However, leg preference may vary between tasks. As athletes are a group of interest for postural stability testing, we evaluated the effect of five leg preference tasks categorization (step up, hop, ball kick, balance, pick up) on single-leg postural stability of 16 field hockey athletes. The 'center of pressure speed' was calculated as the primary outcome variable of single-leg postural stability. Secondary variables were 'mean length of the GRF vector in the horizontal plane', 'mean length of the ankle angular velocity vector', and 'mean length of the hip angular velocity vector', as well as the separate outcomes per degree of freedom. Results showed that leg preference was inconsistent between leg preference tasks. Moreover, the primary and secondary variables yielded no significant difference between the preferred and non-preferred legs, regardless of the applied leg preference task categorization (p>0.05). The present findings do not support the usability of leg preference tasks in controlling for bias of postural stability. In conclusion, none of the applied leg preference tasks revealed a significant effect on postural stability in healthy field hockey athletes.
    Journal of Biomechanics 10/2013; DOI:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2013.10.002 · 2.50 Impact Factor