The Influence of Ankle Braces on Functional Performance Tests and Ankle Joint Range of Motion

CONTEXT

The lateral ankle sprain is one of the most common lower-extremity injuries in sports. Previous research has found that some prophylactic ankle supports reduce the risk of recurrent ankle sprains and provide extra support to the joint. However, there is a continued concern that these supports may negatively influence performance.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if wearing an ankle brace influences athlete performance and ankle kinematics during functional performance tests.

DESIGN

Repeated measures.

SETTING

University gymnasium.

OTHER PARTICIPANTS

Male and female recreational or competitive athletes (n = 20).

INTERVENTION

Participants performed 3 trials of a standing long jump, vertical jump, 40-yard sprint, and T-drill under each of the following 3 conditions: wearing traditional lace-up brace (brace 1), modified lace-up brace (brace 2), and no-brace.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

A 2-dimensional motion capture camera was used to measure ankle range of motion (ROM) in the sagittal plane during the vertical and standing long jumps and in the frontal plane during the cutting phase of the T-drill. Performance of each test and ankle ROM were compared between each of the braced conditions.

RESULTS

Ankle braces did not influence performance in speed or agility functional performance tests (P > .05). Ankle braces negatively affected performance of the standing long jump (P = .01) and vertical jump (P = .01). There was no significant difference between brace or no-brace conditions in ankle inversion ROM during the T-drill (P > .05). Both brace conditions restricted ROM in the sagittal plane during the vertical and standing long jumps (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Braced conditions restricted sagittal plane ROM during the vertical jump and long jump. This decrease in ROM explains the decline in functional performance also seen during these tests.

Effects of ankle support on lower-extremity functional performance: a meta-analysis

Clinicians surmise that the application of external ankle support reduces the ability to perform functional skills and movements, but the outcomes from some of these studies have been inconclusive.

PURPOSE

To meta-analyze studies regarding the effects of external ankle support on lower-extremity functional performance measures.

METHODS

A total of 93 effects from 17 randomized controlled trials utilizing predominantly crossover designs with recreationally active participants and competitive athletes were subjected to a random-effects meta-analysis. The treatment variable was external ankle support with three levels: adhesive tape, lace-up style, and semirigid style. Differences between mean changes in treatment and control groups were computed as standardized effect sizes for sprint, agility, and vertical jump performance with their 90% confidence intervals (CI). Effect sizes >0.20 were considered substantial.

RESULTS

The greatest effect of ankle support on performance was a negative effect of lace-up style brace on sprint speed (effect size -0.22, 90% CI -0.47 to 0.03), equivalent to approximately 1% impairment of speed. The other effects of external ankle support on performance were insubstantial, though most were negative, and their lower confidence limits allowed for realistic chances of impaired performance. Substantial true variation between studies, although poorly defined, was also present for some effects, further increasing the likelihood of performance impairment in some settings.

CONCLUSIONS

More research is needed to reduce the uncertainty in the effects of external ankle support on performance. In the meantime, it is our opinion that the benefit in preventing injury outweighs the possibility of substantial but small impairment of performance when athletes use external ankle support.

Bracing and rehabilitation—what's new

Based on the recent evidence, ankle bracing and taping do appear to have positive effects on ankle support. For example, both bracing and taping restrict inversion range of motion, with tape and stirrup-style braces providing the best support. Although exercise reduces this restriction, the range remains consistent with levels considered to be within the normal range. Ankle supports also appear to improve the strength of the muscular response to perturbation, potentially providing a stronger muscular contraction. In contrast, ankle supports fail to improve the neuromuscular response time to unexpected perturbations. Thus, it appears that the stronger response may occur too slowly to protect the joint. This slowness of the neuromuscular response, however, may be offset by the support's ability to slow the inversion motion. The slowing of inversion appears to allow the neuromuscular system to respond at or before the point of ligament damage. Finally, ankle supports appear to improve balance only in individuals with previously injured ankles. This suggests that supports may have a selective effect in protecting injured but not uninjured individuals. Despite these positive effects, some cautions should be emphasized. First, most of the studies cited have been performed in the laboratory setting with joint velocities and loads much below what are encountered in the athletic and daily activities. Whether tape and braces can maintain their effectiveness under the more extreme conditions of functional activities remains unclear. Additionally, some evidence suggests that ankle supports may transfer loads to other joints putting them at risk for injury. Thus, further study is needed to determine the risk-to-benefit ratio of ankle supports. Finally, much of the research presented has been done only on uninjured ankles. Based on the current evidence, it seems possible that the effectiveness of ankle supports may differ depending on the population, and it seems clinically important to know whether we can expect the same results for injured and uninjured ankles. Proper and early rehabilitation is important in preventing residual ankle symptoms. Reports indicate that up to 73% of people who sustain a lateral ankle sprain have recurrent sprains, but it is unknown how many of these participants partake in rehabilitation. Proper immobilization and acute care of the injured ankle is imperative. An immobilization boot or strapping that can be removed during early non-weight bearing exercises seems to be most effective. Strength and balance training of the uninjured contralateral limb can be used to assist reaching full recovery in a shorter period of time. Functional exercises can also be performed earlier in the rehabilitation process by reducing the gravitational forces so patients can perform in a pain-free range and still receive the benefits of early activity. Evidence shows that daily ankle disk training assists in preventing ankle sprains, and is a relatively inexpensive and easy alternative to traditional rehabilitation protocols.