This research was funded in part by a grant from the Ferrante and Jackson Physical Therapy Research Fund.

Recent criticism in the literature regarding the effectiveness and costs of ankle taping has lead to an increased use of commercial ankle braces. This study compared the effectiveness of four commercially available ankle braces in limiting range of motion at the ankle before and after a brief exercise session. Twenty-seven healthy subjects, ages 18-36, were tested across all four bracing conditions. For each brace application, a combined passive inversion-eversion movement was evaluated three times: 1) prebrace application, 2) immediate postbrace application, and 3) following a 10 min exercise session. Subjective ratings of brace comfort, support, and preference were also documented. All four braces significantly limited more motion compared to the unbraced ankle, both before and after exercise (p ≤ 0.05). Additionally, the Aircast^® Sport-Stirrup and Ankle Ligament Protector significantly limited more ankle motion than the Swede-O Ankle Support^® and Kallassy Ankle Support^®, both before and after exercise (p ≤ 0.05). Subjectively, the Sport-Stirrup was perceived as the brace providing the most support, but the Kallassy was the most comfortable and most preferred of the four braces studied. These findings demonstrate that provided support must be balanced with perceived comfort in the prescription of an ankle orthosis.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1992;15(1):10-18.

Key Words: ankle sprain, range of motion, bracing

Normative data should help in the development of treatment goals. The purpose of this study was to generate predictive models relating isokinetic ankle testing performance to anthropometric and demographic variables. The subjects were 44 healthy females (age = 40.48, s = 11.98) and 43 healthy males (age = 39.83, s = 10.31) between the ages of 19 and 62. For each subject the investigators measured concentric peak torque and angular work at 60 and 120°/sec for Biodex eversion and inversion. Stepwise regression analyses were used to examine the relationship between each isokinetic variable and the following predictor variables: age, side of lower extremity dominance, height, weight, percentage of body fat, leg girth, and shoe size. Separate analyses were conducted for females and males. The results indicate a significant relationship (p < 0.001) between multiple variable models and the isokinetic performance variables. The magnitude of the relationships may be explained, in part, by the restricted range of Biodex eversion and inversion measurements of peak torque and angular work. The models generated in this study can be used to establish muscle performance goals for patient rehabilitation programs.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1992;15(1):24-31.

Key Words: ankle muscle strength, anthropometric measures, modeling

This study was supported in part by a grant from MedX Inc., Ocala, FL.

Among strength testing methods, varying degrees of stabilization are used. The purpose of this study was to compare isometric lumbar extension strength values obtained from two different restraint systems designed to isolate the lumbar extensors through pelvic stabilization. Both restraint systems stabilized the pelvis by preventing movement of the lower extremities during testing with the subject in a seated position. One restraint system (KNEE) applied pressure just below the knees while the lower leg was positioned at 120° of knee flexion. The other (FOOT) applied pressure to the bottom of the feet while the lower leg was positioned at 60° of knee flexion. Fifteen men (age = 37 ± 10 yr; height = 177.7 ± 5.3 cm; weight = 61.4 ± 10.9 kg) and six women (age = 43 ± 7 yr; height = 170.9 ± 7.9 cm; weight = 61.4 ± 10.9 kg) were tested at seven positions through 72° range of motion with each restraint system. Analysis of variance for repeated measures indicated a significant difference (p ≤ 0.05) between restraint systems and a significant restraint system by joint angle interaction. Subjects were able to generate 9.4 to 10.9 percent more torque at 72, 60, 48, and 36° of lumbar flexion with the KNEE restraint system compared to the FOOT restraint system. No differences (p > 0.05) between restraints were noted at 24, 12, or 0° flexion. Thus, the restraint system employed can influence lumbar extension strength values and affect the shape of the isometric lumbar extension strength curve.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1992;15(1):37-42.

Key Words: isometric strength, lumbar extension, pelvic stabilization