Concentric Evertor Strength Differences and Functional Ankle Instability: A Meta-Analysis
Concentric Evertor Strength Differences and Functional Ankle Instability: A Meta-Analysis
复制标题
DOI：
10.4085/1062-6050-44.6.653
复制
发表时间：
2009-11-01
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Ross, Scott E.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Arnold, Brent L.;Linens, Shelley W.;Ross, Scott E.
目的：探讨同心动肌无力是否与功能性踝关节不稳定（FAI）有关。数据来源：我们在2007年11月进行了一项电子搜索，仅限于英文，使用PubMed， Pre-CINAHL， CINAHL和SPORTDiscus。利用科学引文索引对电子检索的研究进行前向检索。最后，我们对所有选定的研究进行了手工检索，并联系了各自的作者以确定其他研究。我们收录了同行评议的手稿、论文和论文。研究选择：我们评估了通过电子检索确定的研究的标题和摘要。研究是通过共识选择的，只有当他们包括FAI或慢性踝关节不稳定和力量结果的参与者时才进行审查。如果报告了FAI和稳定组（或踝关节）的均值和SDs（或其他相关统计信息，如P值或t值和n组），则将研究纳入分析。数据提取：数据由作者独立提取，反复检查准确性，仅限于同心外翻强度的结果。我们为每项研究的质量打分。结果被编码为快或慢速度（即，分别等于或大于110度/秒或小于110度/秒）。数据综合：数据包括FAI组和未损伤组（或踝关节）的均值、SDs和组样本量（或其他适当的统计信息）。每个结果的均数标准差（SDM）使用合并SD计算。我们使用Z统计量测试单个和总体sdm，并使用Q统计量比较快慢速度。我们的分析显示，FAI踝关节弱于稳定踝关节（SDM = 0.224, Z = 4.0, P < 0.001, 95%可信区间= 0.115,0.333）。我们发现快速和慢速sdm之间没有差异（SDMFast = 0.189, SDMSlow = 0.244, Q = 29.9, df = 24, P = .187）。由于SDM较小，这种在临床上测量踝关节力量的方法可能需要重新评估。
Objective: To determine whether concentric evertor muscle weakness was associated with functional ankle instability (FAI).Data Sources: We conducted an electronic search through November 2007, limited to English, and using PubMed, Pre-CINAHL, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus. A forward search was conducted using the Science Citation Index on studies from the electronic search. Finally, we conducted a hand search of all selected studies and contacted the respective authors to identify additional studies. We included peer-reviewed manuscripts, dissertations, and theses.Study Selection: We evaluated the titles and abstracts of studies identified by the electronic searches. Studies were selected by consensus and reviewed only if they included participants with FAI or chronic ankle instability and strength outcomes. Studies were included in the analysis if means and SDs (or other relevant statistical information, such as P values or t values and group n's) were reported for FAI and stable groups (or ankles).Data Extraction: Data were extracted by the authors independently, cross-checked for accuracy, and limited to outcomes of concentric eversion strength. We rated each study for quality. Outcomes were coded as either fast or slow velocity (ie, equal to or greater than 110 degrees/s or less than 110 degrees/s, respectively).Data Synthesis: Data included the means, SDs, and group sample sizes (or other appropriate statistical information) for the FAI and uninjured groups (or ankles). The standard difference in the means (SDM) for each outcome was calculated using the pooled SD. We tested individual and overall SDMs using the Z statistic and comparisons between fast and slow velocities using the Q statistic. Our analysis revealed that ankles with FAI were weaker than stable ankles (SDM = 0.224, Z = 4.0, P < .001, 95% confidence interval = 0.115, 0.333). We found no difference between the fast- and slow-velocity SDMs (SDMFast = 0.189, SDMSlow = 0.244, Q = 29.9, df = 24, P = .187). Because of the small SDM, this method of measuring ankle strength in the clinical setting may need to be reevaluated.