Article Text

PDF
060
THE EFFECT OF ANKLE TAPING ON SHOCK ABSORPTION CHARACTERISTICS OF LOWER EXTREMITY
  1. Joon-Haeng Cho1,
  2. Hyung-pil Jun2,3,
  3. Young Hee Lee3,6,
  4. Sae Yong Lee3,4,5
  1. 1Department of Liberal Art and Science, Han Sung University, Seoul, Korea, South
  2. 2Department of Movement Sciences, University of Idaho, Moscow, USA
  3. 3Yonsei Institute of Sports and Exercise Medicine (YISSEM), Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea, South
  4. 4Integrative Sports Science Research Laboratory, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea, South
  5. 5Frontier Research Institute of Convergence Sports Science, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea, South
  6. 6Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, College of Medicine, Yonsei University, Wonju, Korea, South

    Abstract

    Background Ankle taping has been widely used to prevent recurrent ankle sprain during dynamic tasks. However, it may alter joint stiffness result in an adverse effect on a shock absorption to the entire lower extremity kinetic chain during landing due to a restricted ankle joint.

    Objective To investigate changes in lower extremity biomechanics with and without taping during drop landing (DL).

    Design Case control study.

    Setting Laboratory.

    Patients (or Participants) A total of active 53 male college students with no history of lower extremity surgery or injury were participated.

    Interventions Each participant performed eight drop landings (four before and four after ankle taping). Eight infrared-optical cameras system (Vicon Motion Systems Ltd. Oxford, UK) and force-plates (Bertec Corporation. Columbus, OH) were used to collect all kinematics and kinetics during DL.

    Main Outcome Measurements Sagittal plane joint kinematics and kinetics were extracted between initial contact and maximum knee flexion angle. Cohen's D effect size (d) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated to analyze size of difference.

    Results Sagittal plane total excursion of the ankle was statistically decreased (d=1.01, CI:0.61∼1.42) but knee and hip were not changed after taping. Joint stiffness showed no significant changes at the ankle (d=−0.25, CI:−0.63∼0.13), knee (d=−0.11, CI:−0.49∼0.27), and hip (d=−0.12, 95% CI:−0.51∼0.26) after taping There were significant decrease in both eccentric work (d=−0.78, 95% CI:−1.18∼-0.39) and contribution to total work (d=0.58, CI:0.19∼0.97) at ankle while no changes observed in the knee and the hip.

    Conclusions Even though ankle taping reduces ankle joint total excursion during DL and may impact on ankle stiffness, it does not alter proximal joint kinematics and stiffness. Reduced both eccentric work and%work at the ankle joint indicates possible changes in shock absorption mechanism during landing. Therefore, the clinicians may consider the importance of proximal joint movement strategy to attenuate shock during landing.

    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.