(Poster) Does shank to foot length ratio influence knee-to-wall ankle DROM performance?

Abstract

AIM The aim of this study was to establish if a shank-to foot-length ratio had an influence on the knee-to-wall assessment score.

Full text

Email: rudi.meir@scu.edu.au
Web: http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/hahs
Does shank- to foot-length rao inuence knee-to-wall
ankle DROM performance?
Rudi Meir, Zachary Crowley-McHaan, John Whing and Sonja Coetzee
School of Health and Human Sciences, Southern Cross University, Lismore, New South Wales, Australia
AIM
The aim of this study was to
establish if a shank- to foot-
length rao had an inuence on
the knee-to-wall assessment
score.
INTRODUCTION
Ankle dorsiexion range of moon
(DROM) is oen assessed to
establish funconal ROM of this
joint. Ankle mobility is an
important factor in inuencing
performance during squang,
jumping and landing, movements
of daily living and balance (1-4). A
number of methods can be used
to assess ankle DROM. One such
method that is popular among
strength and condioning (S&C)
coaches is the knee-to-wall
assessment method, which
establishes a linear measure for
the distance of the foot away from
the wall during a weight bearing
lunge. However, such a measure
may be confounded by the relave
lengths of an individual’s foot and
shank. The aim of this study was
to establish if a shank- to foot-
length rao had an inuence on
the knee-to-wall assessment
score.
The Australian Strength and Condioning
Associaon:
2016 Internaonal Conference on Applied
Strength and Condioning
assessment of ankle DROM. Ankle
DROM was assessed using two
methods: i) knee-to-wall method;
ii) and standard extendable joint
goniometer. All measures were
taken by the same rater on one
test occasion. Measures were
taken twice on each ankle using
the two methods of assessment
with the rst measure on both test
occasions being the knee-to-wall
assessment (Figure 1). Aer
compleng a warm-up a single
All variables of interest were
normally distributed, therefore
Pearson correlaons were used. A
signicant posive correlaon was
found between foot and shank
length for both right (p <0.001,
r = .877) and le (p <0.001,
r = .880). No other signicant
correlaons were found between
all other variables (>0.05).
RESULTS
measure on the le ankle followed
by the right using the knee-to-wall
method was determined.
Measurements then alternated
between the le and right ankle.
Both ankles were then assessed
using the goniometer aer the
knee-to-wall assessment had been
completed.
Findings suggest that neither the
length of the foot, length of the
shank, nor their rao, had any
inuence on the knee-to-wall
assessment of ankle joint
exibility in the sample
analysed. It is reasonable to
conclude therefore, that the
knee-to-wall technique provides
valid informaon about ankle
joint DROM, an important factor
in a range of lower body
funconal movements. S&C
coaches can use this simple
ankle DROM assessment
method with greater condence.
Figure 1: Posion when performing weight-
bearing lunge for Knee-to-wall assessment with
goniometer landmarks also idened.
CONCLUSION
References
1. Myer GD, Kushner AM, Brent JL, et al. The Back Squat: A Proposed Assessment of
Funconal Decits and Technical Factors That Limit Performance. Strength Cond J. 2014;36
(6):4-27.
2. Menz HB, Morris ME, Lord SR. Foot and ankle characteriscs associated with impaired
balance and funconal ability in older people. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2005;60
(12):1546-1552.
3. Bohannon RW, Tiberio D, Waters G. Moon measured from forefoot and hindfoot
landmarks during passive ankle dorsiexion range of moon. J Orthop Sport Phys. 1991;13
(1):20-22.
4. Whing JW, Steele JR, McGhee DE, Munro BJ. Dorsiexion capacity aects achilles tendon
loading during drop landings. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011;43(4):706-713.
Lateral femoral
condyle landmark
Lateral malleolus
landmark
METHOD
Table 1: Basic descripve measures of
anatomical segment lengths and rao.
*
**
Tibiale mediale-sphyrion biale distance
Tip of akropodion to the pternion
**
*
Parcipants (N = 15) had their foot
length (p of the akropodion i.e.
p of longest toes, to the pternion
i.e. most posterior point on the
calcaneus) and shank length
(biale mediale-sphyrion biale
score) determined prior to