Bracing does not improve dynamic stability in chronic ankle instability subjects.
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the effects of an ankle brace on dynamic postural stability, measured with Time to Stabilization (TTS), in subjects with chronic ankle instability (CAI).


METHODS
Two-within (Condition, Side) repeated measures.


METHODS
Research laboratory.


METHODS
Fifteen subjects with unilateral CAI.


METHODS
Subjects participated in two testing sessions during which a single-limb jump-landing task was performed with one of two conditions: lace-up ankle brace or no ankle brace. Ground reaction forces were used to calculate Resultant Vector TTS (RVTTS).


RESULTS
For RVTTS, there were no statistically significant main effects for Side (F(1,14) = 1.005; p = 0.33) or Condition (F(1,14) = 2.48; p = 0.14), as well as no significant interaction effect (F(1,14) = 1.67; p = 0.22).


CONCLUSIONS
While TTS is a useful outcome tool for identifying deficits in subjects with CAI and improvements related to ankle rehabilitation, this measure of dynamic stability does not appear to be sensitive in detecting the influence of the application of an ankle brace in this pathological group. Researchers need to establish what other testing methods will be the best for determining the outcome of the application of an ankle brace in the laboratory setting to coincide with the epidemiology data that support the use of these devices.
University of Toledo, 2801 W. Bancroft St, Toledo, OH 43606, United States. phillip.gribble@utoledo.edu
Phillip A
PA
Gribble
Brittany L
BL
Taylor
Junji
J
Shinohara
D000293:Adolescent; D000704:Analysis of Variance; D016512:Ankle Injuries / Q000534:rehabilitation*; D000843:Ankle Joint; D001265:Athletic Injuries / Q000534:rehabilitation*; D001915:Braces; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007593:Joint Instability / Q000534:rehabilitation*; D008297:Male; D004856:Postural Balance; D011434:Proprioception; D011597:Psychomotor Performance; D013997:Time Factors