...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of athletic training >Rehabilitation for Chronic Ankle Instability With or Without Destabilization Devices: A Randomized Controlled Trial
【24h】

Rehabilitation for Chronic Ankle Instability With or Without Destabilization Devices: A Randomized Controlled Trial

机译：有或没有失稳装置的慢性踝关节不稳的康复：一项随机对照试验

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Context: Individuals with chronic ankle instability (CAI) have deficits in neuromuscular control and altered movement patterns. Ankle-destabilization devices have been shown to increase lower extremity muscle activity during functional tasks and may be useful tools for improving common deficits and self-reported function. Objective: To determine whether a 4-week rehabilitation program that includes destabilization devices has greater effects on self-reported function, range of motion (ROM), strength, and balance than rehabilitation without devices in patients with CAI. Design: Randomized controlled clinical trial. Setting: Laboratory. Patients or Other Participants: A total of 26 patients with CAI (7 men, 19 women; age = 21.34 ± 3.06 years, height = 168.96 ± 8.77 cm, mass = 70.73 ± 13.86 kg). Intervention(s): Patients completed baseline measures and were randomized into no-device and device groups. Both groups completed 4 weeks of supervised, impairment-based progressive rehabilitation with or without devices and then repeated baseline measures. Main Outcome Measure(s): We assessed self-reported function using the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure. Ankle ROM was measured with an inclinometer. Ankle strength was assessed using a handheld dynamometer during maximal voluntary isometric contractions. Balance was measured using a composite score of 3 reach directions from the Star Excursion Balance Test and a force plate to calculate center of pressure during eyes-open and eyes-closed single-limb balance. We compared each dependent variable using a 2 × 2 (group × time) analysis of variance and post hoc tests as appropriate and set an a priori α level at .05. The Hedges g effect sizes and associated 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Results: We observed no differences between the no-device and device groups for any measure. However, both groups had large improvements in self-reported function and ankle strength. Conclusions: Incorporating destabilization devices into rehabilitation did not improve ankle function more effectively than traditional rehabilitation tools because both interventions resulted in similar improvements. Impairment-based progressive rehabilitation improved clinical outcomes associated with CAI.
机译：背景：患有慢性踝关节不稳（CAI）的个体在神经肌肉控制方面存在缺陷，并且运动方式发生了改变。踝关节固定装置已显示可在功能性任务期间增加下肢肌肉活动，并且可能是改善常见缺陷和自我报告功能的有用工具。目的：确定包括失稳装置在内的为期4周的康复计划是否比CAI患者不使用装置进行康复对自我报告的功能，运动范围（ROM），力量和平衡有更大的影响。设计：随机对照临床试验。地点：实验室。患者或其他参与者：总计26​​例CAI患者（男7例，女19例;年龄= 21.34±3.06岁，身高= 168.96±8.77厘米，体重= 70.73±13.86千克）。干预措施：患者完成基线测量，并随机分为无器械组和器械组。两组均在有或没有器械的情况下完成了为期4周的，基于损伤的有监督的逐步康复，然后重复了基线测量。主要观察指标：我们使用“足踝功能评价”评估了自我报告的功能。用倾角仪测量踝ROM。在最大自愿等距收缩过程中，使用手持式测功机评估踝关节力量。使用来自Star Excursion Balance Test的3个到达方向的综合得分和测力板来测量平衡，以计算睁眼和闭眼单肢平衡期间的压力中心。我们使用2×2（组×时间）的方差分析和事后检验对每个因变量进行了比较，并进行了事后检验，并将先验α水平设置为0.05。计算了Hedges g效应大小和相关的95％置信区间。结果：在任何措施下，我们都观察到无设备组和无设备组之间没有差异。但是，两组的自我报告功能和脚踝力量都有很大的提高。结论：将去稳定装置整合到康复中并不能比传统的康复工具更有效地改善脚踝功能，因为两种干预措施都可以带来类似的改善。基于损伤的进行性康复改善了与CAI相关的临床结局。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号