Literature DB >> 16558320

Taping and semirigid bracing may not affect ankle functional range of motion.

T R Lindley1, T W Kernozek.   

Abstract

The comparative effects of adhesive tape and three semirigid ankle orthoses on ankle functional range of motion were studied on 11 college football athletes. Maximum plantar flexion and maximum dorsiflexion were measured under five conditions to determine functional range of motion. Testing conditions included: control (no supportive device), adhesive tape with moleskin, the Airstirrup "Training" orthosis, the Active Ankle "Trainer" orthosis, and the Ankle Ligament Protector. A 200-Hz video camera was used to record subjects' motions in the sagittal plane while they ran a series of 40-yd sprints. Videotape was analyzed with the Peak Performance Technology Motion Measurement System. Data were analyzed with a Repeated Measures MANOVA. Differences were found among treatments for maximum plantar flexion and functional range of motion. Follow-up analyses indicated that the Ankle Ligament Protector was the only supportive device that was significantly more restrictive than the control. The Airstirrup, Active Ankle, and adhesive tape with moleskin do not significantly affect functional range of motion during running.

Entities:  

Year:  1995        PMID: 16558320      PMCID: PMC1317842     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Athl Train        ISSN: 1062-6050            Impact factor:   2.860


  8 in total

1.  The measurable support of the ankle joint by conventional methods of taping.

Authors:  G L RARICK; G BIGLEY; R KARST; R M MALINA
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1962-09       Impact factor: 5.284

2.  Comparison of support provided by a semirigid orthosis and adhesive ankle taping before, during, and after exercise.

Authors:  T A Greene; S K Hillman
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  1990 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 6.202

3.  The Effects of the Swede-O, New Cross, and McDavid Ankle Braces and Adhesive Ankle Taping on Speed, Balance, Agility, and Vertical Jump.

Authors:  D L Paris
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 2.860

4.  Systematic ankle stabilization and the effect on performance.

Authors:  J R Robinson; E C Frederick; L B Cooper
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  1986-12       Impact factor: 5.411

5.  Measurement and reduction of noise in kinematics of locomotion.

Authors:  D A Winter; H G Sidwall; D A Hobson
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  1974-03       Impact factor: 2.712

6.  Retrospective comparison of taping and ankle stabilizers in preventing ankle injuries.

Authors:  G D Rovere; T J Clarke; C S Yates; K Burley
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  1988 May-Jun       Impact factor: 6.202

7.  The measured effect of taping on combined foot and ankle motion before and after exercise.

Authors:  R M Fumich; A E Ellison; G J Guerin; P D Grace
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  1981 May-Jun       Impact factor: 6.202

8.  Three-dimensional kinematics of the taped ankle before and after exercise.

Authors:  R K Laughman; T A Carr; E Y Chao; J W Youdas; F H Sim
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  1980 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 6.202

  8 in total
  11 in total

Review 1.  The effect of ankle bracing on athletic performance.

Authors:  S D Bot; W van Mechelen
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 11.136

2.  Biomechanical and Neuromuscular Effects of Ankle Taping and Bracing.

Authors:  Gary B Wilkerson
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 2.860

3.  A comparison of moleskin tape, linen tape, and lace-up brace on joint restriction and movement performance.

Authors:  R C Metcalfe; G A Schlabach; M A Looney; E J Renehan
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 2.860

4.  Effects of tape and exercise on dynamic ankle inversion.

Authors:  M D Ricard; S M Sherwood; S S Schulthies; K L Knight
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 2.860

5.  The effects of two adhesive ankle-taping methods on strength, power, and range of motion in female athletes.

Authors:  Katherine E Quackenbush; Paula R J Barker; Shauna M Stone Fury; David G Behm
Journal:  N Am J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2008-02

Review 6.  Role of ankle taping and bracing in the athlete.

Authors:  M J Callaghan
Journal:  Br J Sports Med       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 13.800

7.  Gait kinematics after taping in participants with chronic ankle instability.

Authors:  Lisa Chinn; Jay Dicharry; Joseph M Hart; Susan Saliba; Robert Wilder; Jay Hertel
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2014-05-19       Impact factor: 2.860

8.  Prophylactic ankle braces and knee varus-valgus and internal-external rotation torque.

Authors:  Kandy Venesky; Carrie L Docherty; Jesus Dapena; John Schrader
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2006 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.860

9.  Effects of Prophylactic Ankle Supports on Vertical Ground Reaction Force During Landing: A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Wenxin Niu; Tienan Feng; Lejun Wang; Chenghua Jiang; Ming Zhang
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2016-02-23       Impact factor: 2.988

Review 10.  Effectiveness of external ankle support. Bracing and taping in rugby union.

Authors:  P A Hume; D F Gerrard
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 11.136

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.