Taping and bracing in the prevention of ankle sprains: current concepts

Attitudes and practices of Australian healthcare and sports workers on the use of ankle supports for management and prevention of lateral ankle sprains: A cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVE

Explore attitudes and practices of Australian professionals using ankle taping or bracing for the management and prevention of lateral ankle sprains.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Anonymous online survey.

PARTICIPANTS

Australian healthcare or athletic workers, registered with an official governing body, involved in the management and/or prevention of lateral ankle sprains.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Quantitative data was collected from 20 close-ended questions. Qualitative data from 14 open-ended questions were categorized into topics using inductive thematic analysis. Data was analysed using descriptive statistics and presented in figures and tabular format.

RESULTS

A total 160 respondents answered the survey; the majority were podiatrists (42.5%), physiotherapists (23%), or sports/athletic trainers (13.8%). Ankle supports were overwhelmingly recommended and considered to be effective in the management (95% and 89% bracing and taping, respectively) and prevention (96% and 92% bracing and taping, respectively) of lateral ankle sprains. For management, semi-rigid brace with straps (26%) and figure eight taping technique (42%) were the most frequently used. For prevention, the most commonly used were soft brace with straps (30%) and the figure eight taping technique (37%).

CONCLUSIONS

Australian professionals expressed a positive attitude towards using ankle supports in the management and prevention of lateral ankle sprains.

Characterization of Ankle Injuries and Associated Risk Factors in the National Basketball Association: Minutes Per Game and Usage Rate Associated With Time Loss

Background

Ankle injuries are more common in the National Basketball Association (NBA) compared with other professional sports.

Purpose/Hypothesis

The purpose of this study was to report the incidence and associated risk factors of ankle injuries in NBA athletes. It was hypothesized that factors associated with an increased physiologic burden, such as minutes per game (MPG), usage rate, and associated lower extremity injury, would be associated with increased ankle injury risk and time loss.

Study Design

Descriptive epidemiology study.

Methods

Ankle injury data from the 2015-2016 through 2020-2021 NBA seasons were evaluated. The truncated 2019-2020 season due to the COVID-19 pandemic was omitted. The primary outcome was the incidence of ankle injuries, reported per 1000 game-exposures (GEs). Secondary analysis was performed to identify risk factors for ankle injuries through bivariate analysis and multivariable logistic regression of player demographic characteristics, performance statistics, injury characteristics, and previous lower extremity injuries. Factors influencing the time loss after injury were assessed via a negative binomial regression analysis.

Results

A total of 554 ankle injuries (4.06 injuries per 1000 GEs) were sustained by NBA players over 5 NBA seasons, with sprain/strain the most common injury type (3.71 injuries per 1000 GEs). The majority of ankle injury events (55%) resulted in 2 to 10 game absences. The likelihood of sustaining an ankle injury was significantly associated with a greater number of games played (P = .029) and previous injury to the hip, hamstring, or quadriceps (P = .004). Increased length of absence due to ankle injury was associated with greater height (P = .019), MPG (P < .001), usage rate (P = .025), points per game (P = .011), and a prior history of foot (P = .003), ankle (P < .001), and knee injuries (P < .001).

Conclusion

The incidence of ankle injuries was 4.06 per 1000 GEs in professional basketball players. Games played and prior history of hip, hamstring, or quadriceps injuries were found to be risk factors for ankle injuries. Factors associated with physiologic burden such as MPG and usage rate were associated with an increased time loss after injury.

External Ankle Support and Ankle Biomechanics in Chronic Ankle Instability: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the literature to determine whether external ankle supports influence ankle biomechanics in participants with chronic ankle instability (CAI) during sport-related tasks.

DATA SOURCES

A literature search of MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, and CINAHL databases was conducted in November 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Included studies were randomized crossover or parallel-group controlled trials in which researchers assessed ankle biomechanics during landing, running, or change of direction in participants with CAI using external ankle supports compared with no support.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two authors independently identified studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias (Cochrane risk-of-bias tool version 2) and quality of evidence (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). Random-effects meta-analysis was used to compare between-groups mean differences with 95% CIs. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation recommendations were used to determine the certainty of findings.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A total of 13 studies of low to moderate risk of bias were included. During landing, very low-grade evidence indicated external ankle supports reduce frontal-plane excursion (mean difference [95% CI] = -1.83° [-2.97°, -0.69°], P = .002), plantar-flexion angle at initial contact (-3.86° [-6.18°, -1.54°], P = .001), and sagittal-plane excursion (-3.45° [-5.00°, -1.90°], P < .001) but not inversion angle at initial contact (-1.00° [-3.59°, 1.59°], P = .45). During running, very low- to low-grade evidence indicated external ankle supports reduce sagittal-plane excursion (-5.21° [-8.59°, -1.83°], P = .003) but not inversion angle at initial contact (0.32° [-2.11°, 1.47°], P = .73), frontal-plane excursion (-1.31° [-3.24°, 0.63°], P = .19), or plantar-flexion angle at initial contact (-0.12° [-3.54°, 3.29°], P = .94). Studies investigating changes of direction were insufficient.

CONCLUSIONS

Very low-grade evidence indicated external ankle supports reduce frontal-plane excursion but not inversion angle at initial contact in participants with CAI during landing. Limiting frontal-plane excursion may reduce ankle-sprain risk. Frontal-plane ankle kinematics were not influenced by external ankle supports during running. Sagittal-plane reductions were observed with external ankle supports during landing and running with low to very low certainty, but their influence on ankle-sprain risk is undetermined.

Prevention of Lateral Ankle Sprains

CONTEXT

Given the frequency of ankle sprains, especially in the athletic population, prevention is a primary task of athletic trainers and other sports health care professionals.

OBJECTIVE

To discuss the current evidence as it relates to prophylactic programs for the prevention of ankle sprains and to provide critical interpretation of the evidence supporting and refuting the implementation of preventive programs.

CONCLUSIONS

External prophylactic supports and preventive exercise programs are effective for reducing the risk of ankle sprains in both uninjured and previously injured populations. Ankle bracing appears to offer the best outcomes in terms of cost and risk reduction. However, there remains a paucity of well-designed, prospective randomized controlled trials relevant to the primary prevention of lateral ankle sprains, especially across a range of sport settings.