1) to assess possible confounding factors in measuring neuromuscular control of the ankle with a *single-leg stance wobble board* test2) to compare neuromuscular ankle control with the *single-leg stance wobble board* test between individuals with…
ID
Source
Brief title
Condition
- Bone and joint injuries
Synonym
Research involving
Sponsors and support
Intervention
Outcome measures
Primary outcome
Single-leg-stance Wobble Board test, assessed by ground reaction forces
parameters *mean centre of pressure velocity* and *mean horizontal ground
reaction forces*.
Secondary outcome
Postural control: mean centre of pressure velocity and mean horizontal ground
reaction forces during single-leg-stance with eyes open and closed on a Kistler
force plate
Ground reaction forces during one-leg-hop test
Orthopaedic clinical ankle examination
Foot pressure management using the Footscan® during two-leg-stance and gait
Subjective severity of the functional ankle instability (questionnaire):
- Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool (CAIT)
- Chronic Ankle Instability Scale (CAIS)
Clinical ankle score (form will be filled in by investigator):
- Karlsson score
Pre-injury and actual activity level:
- Tegner score
- One of four classes according to the International Knee Documentation
Committee standards: (1) strenuous, which includes jumping, pivoting, hard
cutting (football, soccer, volleyball, tennis, hockey); (2) moderate, which
involving agility of the lower limbs but not jumping, hard cutting, or pivoting
(heavy manual work, skiing); (3) light, which includes sports that do not
involve agility of the lower limbs (light manual work, jogging, running); or
(4) sedentary. Activity level was defined on the basis of the most strenuous
work or leisure activities that the patient performed on a regular basis.
Background summary
Injuries to the lateral ankle ligaments are the most common injuries across a
wide variety of sports, accounting for approximately 25% of all sports-related
injuries. People who suffer from lateral ankle sprains are likely to re-injure
the same ankle within a year. Moreover, 10-20% develop chronic ankle
instability with daily impairment and this group has an increased risk to
develop ankle osteoarthritis. Considering the effectiveness of dynamic balance
board training in reducing ankle sprain recurrence risk, a single-leg stance on
a Wobble Board test might be expected to increase sensitivity in measuring
neuromuscular control of the ankle. If so, this new single-leg-stance wobble
board test could be of clinical importance in developing a classification
scheme for lateral ankle sprains, thereby contributing to a proper treatment
selection.
Study objective
1) to assess possible confounding factors in measuring neuromuscular control of
the ankle with a *single-leg stance wobble board* test
2) to compare neuromuscular ankle control with the *single-leg stance wobble
board* test between individuals with recent acute lateral ankle ligament
rupture and healthy controls
3) to assess the diagnostic value of a *single-leg-stance wobble board* test in
discriminating between individuals with chronic ankle instability and healthy
controls
Study design
1) cross-sectional observation of 100 healthy individuals with no ankle problems
2) case-control comparison between 40 individuals with acute lateral ankle
ligament rupture (grade II/III) and 40 healthy controls selected out of the 100
healthy individuals. Matched on group level for age, gender and other important
variables assessed during analysis of design 1.
3) case-control comparison between 20 individuels with chronic ankle
instability and 20 healthy controls selected out of the 100 healthy
individuals. Matched on group level for age, gender and ohter important
variables assessed during analysis of design 1.
Study burden and risks
Participants with ankle problems are required to visit the human movement
laboratory of the Spaarne Hospital once, for a period of 45-60 minutes.
Participants without ankle problems will be measured at the company of their
daily work. In total, 24 one-leg-stance tests of 10 seconds have to be
performed. Additionally, subjects have to perform 6 trials of a small
single-leg hop test. Furthermore, a two-leg-stance and a gait cycle on a
digital footscan have to be carried out. Besides the functional tests, an
orthopaedic physical examination of both ankles will be done. Thereafter, 2
short questionnaires (Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool, Chronic Ankle
Instability Scale) have to be filled out to assess subjective functional ankle
instability and 1 questionnaire about detailed history of injuries and
training. The use of the one-leg stance with and without a Wobble Board are
widely accepted and performed without supervision in rehabilitation programs of
acute and chronic ankle instability.
According to the researcher there are no extra risks involved with
participating in the present study.
Spaarnepoort 1
2134 TM Hoofddorp
NL
Spaarnepoort 1
2134 TM Hoofddorp
NL
Listed location countries
Age
Inclusion criteria
18-40 years old, BMI < 30
1) 100 healthy individuals with no ankle problems, and no acute lateral ankle sprain in the last year, and no current diminished activity due to lower extremity/back problems in the past.
2) 40 individuals with recent (<7 days) acute lateral ligament rupture grade II/III (partial- or complet rupture): signs of lateral haematoma, swelling and pain with palpation of the lateral ligament complex after 5-7 days post-injury. Furthermore, no pre-existent chronic ankle instability, and no acute lateral ligament rupture in the last 1 year, and no pre-existent diminished activity due to lower extremity/back problems in the past.
3) 16-20 individuals with chronic ankle instability: residual symptoms of *giving way* and feelings of ankle joint instability for a minimum period of 6 months.
Exclusion criteria
Signs of neurological disease
Signs of vestibular disease
Signs of orthopaedic disease (other than the inclusion criteria)
History of fractures or current associated fractures of the lower extremities
No other current injuries of the lower extremity or back
Insufficient knowledge of the Dutch language
Design
Recruitment
Followed up by the following (possibly more current) registration
No registrations found.
Other (possibly less up-to-date) registrations in this register
No registrations found.
In other registers
| Register | ID |
|---|---|
| CCMO | NL39212.094.11 |