J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1987;9(5):190-193.

Ultrasound is a commonly used therapeutic modality for which there is little research on the effect of treatment dosage on the extent of tissue heating. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of 2 different ultrasound devices, angle of ultrasound application, and treatment time on the temperature of a tissue phantom. Four trials were performed at 4 ultrasound application angles (90°, 80°, 70°, and 60°) with both an Excel UltraMax and a Mettler Sonicator 720. A continuous 1-MHz frequency at 2.0 W/cm2 was administered for 5 minutes, with tissue phantom temperature recorded at 1-minute intervals. The analysis of the data revealed significant main effects between ultrasound devices, angle of application, and treatment times. Interactions were identified between ultrasound device and treatment times and angle of application and treatment times. Analysis of simple effects revealed significant differences between ultrasound devices after 2, 3, 4, and 5 minutes of treatment and between treatment times and 80° and 60° angles of application. Maximal temperature increase after a 5-minute treatment was 2.025°C. This level of tissue heating falls below expected values and may not yield therapeutic results. The thermal effects were noted to be greatest at 80° and 90° angles of application. Despite appropriate calibration and identical treatment protocols, the 2 ultrasound devices yielded significantly different tissue phantom temperatures, which were notably lower than expected values. We concluded that direct monitoring of ultrasound device output and calculation of treatment dosage should occur on a routine basis, as treatment outcome will certainly be affected by the actual dosage of ultrasonic energy.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1998;27(1):27-31.

Key Words: ultrasound, therapeutic heating, tissue phantom

No prophylactic ankle stabilizer performance study has been conducted to date using high school football players, ie., players who are at risk of ankle sprains. In addition, the effect that prophylactic ankle stabilizer use has on performance by player position is unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of a semirigid and softshell prophylactic ankle stabilizer on performance by football player position in events testing vertical jump, speed, and agility. Twenty-five high school football players participated in the study. All subjects denied any history of ankle injury within 1 year of the study and previous experience with prophylactic ankle stabilizer use. Subjects completed 3 tests [vertical jump, 36.56-m (40-yd) sprint, and 18.28-m (20-yd) shuttle run] under 3 different ankle treatments: Aircast SportStirrup, DonJoy RocketSoc, and nonbraced control. Results of the study indicated that the Aircast SportStirrup and DonJoy RocketSoc, when compared with a nonbraced control, had no significant effect on vertical jump, 36.56-m (40-yd) sprint, and 18.28-m (20-yd) shuttle run performance. Skill players had faster 36.56-m (40-yd) sprint times than strength players regardless of ankle treatment. In conclusion, the Aircast SportStirrup and DonJoy RocketSoc did not facilitate or adversely affect performance involving vertical jump, speed, and agility of high school football players.

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1995;21(3):147-152.

Key Words: ankle, stabilizing prophylactic, athletic performance