Athletic trainers use of prophylactic devices in the ankle

Context. Lateral ankle sprains are the most common athletic injury accounting for almost 80% of all ankle sprains. After spraining an ankle, proprioception, strength, and range of motion is decreased. This causes a high re-injury rate of 85%. Athletic trainers frequently choose a prophylactic device in order to aid in the recovery and rehabilitate ankle injuries. There has been previous research on the affects of prophylactic devices on functional performance, but none on preference of prophylactic device by athletic trainers and the reasons behind the preference. Objective. To examine athletic trainers' use of prophylactic devices in the ankle. Design . Descriptive. Patients or other participants. One-hundred ninety six volunteers returned the survey and participated in the study. All were athletic trainers in the high school (N=46), high school/clinic (N=35), or collegiate setting (N=115). Age = 36.9 +/- 11.3 years; years of experience = 13.3 +/- 10.3; female (N=111), male (N=85). Interventions . One thousand athletic trainers who were members of the National Athletic Trainers' Association and who work in the high school, high school/clinic, or college were sent a cover letter and link to the survey. Main outcome measures. Athletic trainers preference of prophylactic device (taping, bracing, or both at the same time) to prevent injury and after injury is obtained through the use of the survey. Chi-Square Test of Independence was used to determine significance. Results. Collegiate athletic trainers were more likely to choose both bracing and taping at the same time after an acute ankle injury (P < .01), to choose a standard close basket weave ankle taping to prevent injury than athletic trainers in the high school or high school/clinic setting (P < .01) and chose the lace-up type of brace compared to athletic trainers in the other settings (P = 0.05). There was no significant difference found for athletic trainers' preference of taping technique after an injury with a (P > 0.05). Athletic trainers also chose reasons for their preference with six of the eight choices significant: knowledge of literature (P<.001), athlete preference (P<.001), personal opinion/ experience (P<.001), preference provides more stability (P<.001), preference prevents injury better (P<.001), preference is easier to apply (P<.001). The two reasons found as not significant were: budgetary limits and skills learned or peer choice. Conclusions. Athletic trainers in the collegiate setting have similar preferences of prophylactic devices.