Is chronic ankle instability associated with contractile thickness of gluteus medius and gluteus maximus during functional movement and exercise? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 SPORT SCIENCES
Lijiang Luan, Jeremy Witchalls, Charlotte Ganderton, Roger Adams, Doa El-Ansary, Jia Han
{"title":"Is chronic ankle instability associated with contractile thickness of gluteus medius and gluteus maximus during functional movement and exercise? A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Lijiang Luan, Jeremy Witchalls, Charlotte Ganderton, Roger Adams, Doa El-Ansary, Jia Han","doi":"10.23736/S0022-4707.24.16199-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The gluteus medius (GMED) and gluteus maximus (GMAX) play a crucial role in postural control, and postural control is impaired in individuals with chronic ankle instability (CAI). However, the association between CAI and the recruitment of these muscles remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to explore the contractile thickness of GMED and GMAX during functional movements in individuals with CAI compared to healthy controls.</p><p><strong>Evidence acquisition: </strong>A systematic search was conducted in six databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, EBSCO, and PEDro). Included studies involved the contractile thickness of GMED and/or GMAX comparing CAI with non-CAI. The extracted data were subjected to meta-analysis for observing the differences between the two. The correlation and difference in contraction between GMED and GMAX were analyzed using the Pearson Correlation Coefficient (PCC) and t-test, respectively.</p><p><strong>Evidence synthesis: </strong>Six studies with 176 participants were found. Contractile thickness measured by ultrasound showed GMED thickness change to be lower in CAI than in controls during functional movements and exercise (WMD: -0.08; 95% CI: -0.11, -0.04; P<0.00001). There was no significant difference between the two groups with respect to contraction of GMAX (WMD: 0.02; 95% CI: -0.01, 0.05; P=0.25). The PCC and P value (t-test) between the ratio of contractile thickness of GMED and GMAX in CAI were 0.397 and 0.029 respectively, indicating activity differences.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>CAI may be associated with weaker GMED recruitment during functional movements and exercise, but the activation of GMAX in CAI may be unaffected.</p>","PeriodicalId":17013,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S0022-4707.24.16199-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The gluteus medius (GMED) and gluteus maximus (GMAX) play a crucial role in postural control, and postural control is impaired in individuals with chronic ankle instability (CAI). However, the association between CAI and the recruitment of these muscles remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to explore the contractile thickness of GMED and GMAX during functional movements in individuals with CAI compared to healthy controls.

Evidence acquisition: A systematic search was conducted in six databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, EBSCO, and PEDro). Included studies involved the contractile thickness of GMED and/or GMAX comparing CAI with non-CAI. The extracted data were subjected to meta-analysis for observing the differences between the two. The correlation and difference in contraction between GMED and GMAX were analyzed using the Pearson Correlation Coefficient (PCC) and t-test, respectively.

Evidence synthesis: Six studies with 176 participants were found. Contractile thickness measured by ultrasound showed GMED thickness change to be lower in CAI than in controls during functional movements and exercise (WMD: -0.08; 95% CI: -0.11, -0.04; P<0.00001). There was no significant difference between the two groups with respect to contraction of GMAX (WMD: 0.02; 95% CI: -0.01, 0.05; P=0.25). The PCC and P value (t-test) between the ratio of contractile thickness of GMED and GMAX in CAI were 0.397 and 0.029 respectively, indicating activity differences.

Conclusions: CAI may be associated with weaker GMED recruitment during functional movements and exercise, but the activation of GMAX in CAI may be unaffected.

慢性踝关节不稳与功能性运动和锻炼时臀中肌和臀大肌的收缩厚度有关吗?系统回顾与荟萃分析。
简介:臀中肌(GMED)和臀大肌(GMAX)在姿势控制中起着至关重要的作用,而慢性踝关节不稳定(CAI)患者的姿势控制能力会受到损害。然而,CAI 与这些肌肉的募集之间的关系仍不清楚。本研究旨在探讨与健康对照组相比,CAI 患者在功能性运动时 GMED 和 GMAX 的收缩厚度:在六个数据库(PubMed、Embase、Cochrane Library、Web of Science、EBSCO 和 PEDro)中进行了系统检索。纳入的研究涉及 GMED 和/或 GMAX 的收缩厚度,并将 CAI 与非 CAI 进行了比较。对提取的数据进行荟萃分析,以观察两者之间的差异。采用皮尔逊相关系数(PCC)和 t 检验分别分析了 GMED 和 GMAX 之间收缩的相关性和差异:共发现六项研究,176 名参与者。超声波测量的收缩厚度显示,在功能性运动和锻炼过程中,CAI患者的GMED厚度变化低于对照组(WMD:-0.08;95% CI:-0.11,-0.04;PC结论:CAI可能与GMED厚度较弱有关:CAI可能与功能性运动和锻炼时GMED募集较弱有关,但CAI中GMAX的激活可能不受影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
5.90%
发文量
393
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness publishes scientific papers relating to the area of the applied physiology, preventive medicine, sports medicine and traumatology, sports psychology. Manuscripts may be submitted in the form of editorials, original articles, review articles, case reports, special articles, letters to the Editor and guidelines.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信