Skip to main content

Table 2 Characteristics of the included studies

From: Neuromuscular training to enhance sensorimotor and functional deficits in subjects with chronic ankle instability: A systematic review and best evidence synthesis

Author

Study Population

Presence

of MI

Groupings/Intervention

Outcome Measures

Significant Findings

Within Group Effect Sizes

Between Group Effect Sizes

Bernier & Perrin, 1998 [20]

48 males & females with FAI

Not specified

Control group (n = 14) - no intervention

Sham electrical stimulation group (n = 14)

Training group (n = 17) - static & dynamic balance training 3 times a week × 6 weeks

SI & MES in SLS for 4 conditions: stable platform with eyes open and eyes closed, and dynamic platform with eyes open and eyes closed

Active and passive JPS data for 7 positions:

15° inversion, 0° degrees neutral, and 10° of eversion, performed at 0° and 25° of plantarflexion. Maximum inversion in 25° plantarflexion was also assessed

Training group showed significant MES improvements over the other 2 groups in AP & ML directions for the stable platform and dynamic platform conditions respectively with eyes closed

Significant within training group improvements were also noted in the A/P and M/L directions for both conditions with eyes closed

MES - stable platform, eyes closed:

A/P direction: 1.08;

95% CI (10.52-30.48)

M/L direction: 1.09;

95% CI (5.28-25.72)

MES - dynamic

platform, eyes closed:

A/P direction: 0.71;

95% CI (68.27-78.73)

M/L direction: 0.958;

95% CI (65.25-74.75)

MES - stable platform, eyes closed:

A/P direction: 0.99

95% CI (12.13-31.87)

M/L direction: 0.92; 95% CI (12.63-33.37)

MES - dynamic platform, eyes closed:

A/P direction: 0.52; 95% CI

(63.9-81.10)

M/L direction: 0.55; 95% CI

(60.9-78.1)

Docherty et al, 1998 [29]

20 healthy college students (10 males, 10 females) with FAI

Not specified

Training group (n = 10) -T-band strengthening 3 times a week × 6 weeks

Control group (n = 10) - no intervention

Dorsiflexor and evertor isometric muscle strengths

Active JPS data collected at 20° for inversion & plantarflexion, & at 10° for eversion and dorsiflexion

Significant beween group interactions for dorisflexion and eversion strength, and inversion, and plantarflexion JPS

Significant improvements in all strength and JPS measures post-test within the training group

Dorsiflexion strength:

2.99; 95% CI (38.51-45.39)

Eversion strength:

0.83; 95% CI (34.42-41.48)

Inversion JPS: 0.98;

95% CI (2.38-7.22)

Eversion JPS: 0.77;

95% CI (1.55-5.15)

Dorsiflexion JPS: 0.85;

95% CI (1.56-4.54)

Plantarflexion JPS: 1.51; 95% CI (2.51-6.79)

Dorsiflexion strength: 2.93;

95% CI (39.31-45.19)

Eversion strength: 1.94; 95% CI (27.77-44.93)

Inversion JPS: 1.32; 95% CI (2.92-6.28)

Plantarflexion JPS: 1.56; 95% CI (2.06-4.84)

  1. MI = mechanical instability; FAI = functional ankle instability, SI = stability index, MES = modified equilibrium score, JPS = joint position sense, A/P = anterior-posterior, M/L = medial/lateral