Christos Fakontis , Paris Iakovidis , Konstantinos Kasimis , Dimitrios Lytras , Georgios Koutras , Antonis Fetlis , Ioannis Algiounidis
{"title":"弹性带阻力训练与本体感觉训练对慢性踝关节不稳定患者平衡和自我报告测量的疗效比较:一项系统综述和荟萃分析。","authors":"Christos Fakontis , Paris Iakovidis , Konstantinos Kasimis , Dimitrios Lytras , Georgios Koutras , Antonis Fetlis , Ioannis Algiounidis","doi":"10.1016/j.ptsp.2023.09.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Proprioceptive training and resistance training are physiotherapy treatment methods for Chronic Ankle Instability (CAI).</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To compare the efficacy of proprioceptive training to resistance training with elastic bands for treating CAI as measured by the Star Excursion Balance Test (SEBT), the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM), and the Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool (CAIT).</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>Our systematic study and meta-analysis was based on the PICOS and PRISMA protocols. The PubMed, PEDro<span>, and ScienceDirect<span> databases were searched for randomized clinical trials on proprioceptive and resistance training. Risk of bias was assessed according to Cochrane guidelines and quality of evidence was reported using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach (GRADE).</span></span></p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Five studies involving 259 patients were included in the review. According to the findings of the meta-analysis, proprioceptive training was similarly effective with resistance training in SEBT and FAAM measures. Compared with resistance exercise, proprioceptive training demonstrated some benefits in CAIT scores (weighted mean difference [WMD] = −2.21, 95% CI = −4.05–0.36), but these intervention results were not clinically significant (MDC, MCID score >3 points).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Low-quality evidence from studies showed that neither of the interventions was superior on the SEBT or the FAAM scores in individuals with CAI because no clinically significant differences were found. More high-quality studies comparing the two interventions are needed to draw firm conclusions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49698,"journal":{"name":"Physical Therapy in Sport","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy of resistance training with elastic bands compared to proprioceptive training on balance and self-report measures in patients with chronic ankle instability: A systematic review and meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Christos Fakontis , Paris Iakovidis , Konstantinos Kasimis , Dimitrios Lytras , Georgios Koutras , Antonis Fetlis , Ioannis Algiounidis\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ptsp.2023.09.009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Proprioceptive training and resistance training are physiotherapy treatment methods for Chronic Ankle Instability (CAI).</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To compare the efficacy of proprioceptive training to resistance training with elastic bands for treating CAI as measured by the Star Excursion Balance Test (SEBT), the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM), and the Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool (CAIT).</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>Our systematic study and meta-analysis was based on the PICOS and PRISMA protocols. The PubMed, PEDro<span>, and ScienceDirect<span> databases were searched for randomized clinical trials on proprioceptive and resistance training. Risk of bias was assessed according to Cochrane guidelines and quality of evidence was reported using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach (GRADE).</span></span></p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Five studies involving 259 patients were included in the review. According to the findings of the meta-analysis, proprioceptive training was similarly effective with resistance training in SEBT and FAAM measures. Compared with resistance exercise, proprioceptive training demonstrated some benefits in CAIT scores (weighted mean difference [WMD] = −2.21, 95% CI = −4.05–0.36), but these intervention results were not clinically significant (MDC, MCID score >3 points).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Low-quality evidence from studies showed that neither of the interventions was superior on the SEBT or the FAAM scores in individuals with CAI because no clinically significant differences were found. More high-quality studies comparing the two interventions are needed to draw firm conclusions.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49698,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Physical Therapy in Sport\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Physical Therapy in Sport\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1466853X23001244\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physical Therapy in Sport","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1466853X23001244","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
Efficacy of resistance training with elastic bands compared to proprioceptive training on balance and self-report measures in patients with chronic ankle instability: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Background
Proprioceptive training and resistance training are physiotherapy treatment methods for Chronic Ankle Instability (CAI).
Objective
To compare the efficacy of proprioceptive training to resistance training with elastic bands for treating CAI as measured by the Star Excursion Balance Test (SEBT), the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM), and the Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool (CAIT).
Method
Our systematic study and meta-analysis was based on the PICOS and PRISMA protocols. The PubMed, PEDro, and ScienceDirect databases were searched for randomized clinical trials on proprioceptive and resistance training. Risk of bias was assessed according to Cochrane guidelines and quality of evidence was reported using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach (GRADE).
Results
Five studies involving 259 patients were included in the review. According to the findings of the meta-analysis, proprioceptive training was similarly effective with resistance training in SEBT and FAAM measures. Compared with resistance exercise, proprioceptive training demonstrated some benefits in CAIT scores (weighted mean difference [WMD] = −2.21, 95% CI = −4.05–0.36), but these intervention results were not clinically significant (MDC, MCID score >3 points).
Conclusion
Low-quality evidence from studies showed that neither of the interventions was superior on the SEBT or the FAAM scores in individuals with CAI because no clinically significant differences were found. More high-quality studies comparing the two interventions are needed to draw firm conclusions.
期刊介绍:
Physical Therapy in Sport is an international peer-reviewed journal that provides a forum for the publication of research and clinical practice material relevant to the healthcare professions involved in sports and exercise medicine, and rehabilitation. The journal publishes material that is indispensable for day-to-day practice and continuing professional development. Physical Therapy in Sport covers topics dealing with the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of injuries, as well as more general areas of sports and exercise medicine and related sports science.
The journal publishes original research, case studies, reviews, masterclasses, papers on clinical approaches, and book reviews, as well as occasional reports from conferences. Papers are double-blind peer-reviewed by our international advisory board and other international experts, and submissions from a broad range of disciplines are actively encouraged.