Comparative Study Between Two Types Of Ankle Instability’s Proprioception And Isokinetic Strength

Objective：To compare the prorioception and isokinetic strength of ankle inversion andeversion in participants with Functional Ankle Instability (FAI) or Mechanical AnkleInstability (MAI).Methods:The participants (including15participants with a history of unilateral FAI and15participants with a history of unilateral MAI and15participants with stable ankles)were tested in both passive replication test and ankle inversion and eversionmovements at the speed of90°/s and180°/s using Biodex System4dynamometer.The absolute error angle of passive replication test was used to assess ankle positionsense. The peak torque，relative peak torque，average power and total work wererecorded and calculated. To analyse respectivly the difference between FAI group,MAI group and control group and correlation of proprioception and muscle strength.Result:1)The absolute error angles of passive replication test on FAI group ankles were morethan that on control group, the absolute error angles of passive replication test on MAIgroup ankles were more than that on control group, there was no significant differencebetween the absolute error angles of passive replication test of FAI group and MAIgroup.2)At the isokinetic speed of90deg/s, the relative peak torque, average power andtotal work of inversion and eversion on MAI group were less than that FAI group andcontrol group. No significant difference for the relative peak torque，average powerand the total work of inversion and eversion were seen between FAI group andcontrol group. At the isokinetic speed of180deg/s, significant differences for therelative peak torque，average power and total work of eversion were seen betweenMAI group and control group, significant differences for the relative peak torque andaverage power of eversion were seen between MAI group and FAI group. Nosignificant difference for the total work of eversion was seen between MAI group andFAI group, the relative peak torque of inversion and eversion on MAI group were lessthan that FAI group and control group. No significant difference for the averagepower and total work of inversion were found among three groups, No significantdifference for the relative peak torque，average power and the total work of inversionand eversion were seen between FAI group and control group.3)At the isokinetic speed of90deg/s，There was no significant correlation betweenthe proprioception and muscle strength in participants with chronic ankle instability.At the isokinetic speed of180deg/s，There was no significant correlation between theproprioception and muscle strength in participants with chronic ankle instability. Conclusion:1）Proprioception of participants with functional ankle instability is worse than thatcontrol group，proprioception of participants with mechanical ankle instability isworse than that control group. It was suggested that participants with FAI or MAIshould take proprioception training.2）There was no significant difference between the isokinetic strength of inversionand eversion of FAI group and control group, but isokinetic strength of participantswith mechanical ankle instability is worse than FAI and control group. It wassuggested that participants with MAI need strength training.3）There was no significant correlation between the proprioception and musclestrength, which means that for participants with FAI should take proprioceptiontraining, for participants with MAI need to do proprioception and strength training.