Article Text

PDF
16 Patient-reported efficacy 6 months after a  4-week rehabilitation intervention in individuals with chronic ankle instability
  1. CJ Wright1,
  2. SW Linens2
  1. 1Department of Health Science, Whitworth University, USA
  2. 2Graduate Sports Medicine, Georgia State University, USA

Abstract

Background There is limited data available on maintenance of improvements seen after short-term rehabilitation interventions for chronic ankle instability (CAI).

Objective To track the patient-reported efficacy of a 4-week intervention [wobble board (WB) or resistance tubing (RT)] in decreasing symptoms of CAI at 6 months post-intervention (6PI) as compared to immediately post-intervention (IPI).

Design Randomised controlled trial.

Setting Athletic training laboratory.

Patients (or participants) Fourteen out of 21 participants (66.7%) responded to an electronic 6 month follow-up questionnaire (age = 19.6 ± 0.9 years, height = 1.63 ± 0.18 m, body mass = 70.5 ± 16.3 kg, 2 males, 12 females, 5 WB, 9 RT). All participants met criteria for chronic ankle instability at enrollment, including a history of ankle sprain, Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool ≤ 25, episodes of giving way ≥ 1 every 6 months).

Interventions Participants completed either resistance tubing (RT) or wobble board (WB) protocols, both 12 sessions over 4 weeks of progressive exercise. WB sessions consisted of five 40 s sets of clockwise and counter-clockwise rotations. RT sessions consisted of 30 concentric contractions against resistance tubing in each of 4 ankle directions.

Main outcome measurements Patient reported symptoms of “giving-way” pre-intervention and at 6PI, global rating of change (GRC) frequencies at IPI and 6PI, and re-sprains at 6PI are presented descriptively. Global rating of function (GRF) at IPI and 6PI was compared using a paired-samples t-test (α = 0.05).

Results GRC indicated that 71.4% of participants rated their condition as improved IPI, whereas only 50% of participants were improved at 6PI. All participants reported “giving-way” pre-intervention; only 57.1% reported “giving-way” at 6PI. Re-sprains occurred in 21.4% of participants. GRF was not significantly different at IPI versus 6PI (p = 0.75; IPI = 91.7 ± 6.3, 6PI = 92.3 ± 10.0).

Conclusions Simple 4-week interventions maintained some but not all improvements at 6PI. Importantly, at least 42.9% of participants would no longer meet the current study’s CAI inclusion criteria due to lack of “giving-way”.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.