Kinematic and kinetic characteristics of individuals with coping lateral ankle sprain during landing and walking/running tasks: A systematic review with meta-analysis

IF 1.4 3区医学 Q4 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL

Clinical Biomechanics Pub Date : 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2025.106437

Hyung Gyu Jeon , Jiho Kang , Se Jong Kim , Jupil Ko , Kyeongtak Song , Sae Yong Lee

{"title":"Kinematic and kinetic characteristics of individuals with coping lateral ankle sprain during landing and walking/running tasks: A systematic review with meta-analysis","authors":"Hyung Gyu Jeon , Jiho Kang , Se Jong Kim , Jupil Ko , Kyeongtak Song , Sae Yong Lee","doi":"10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2025.106437","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>We aimed to synthesize the kinematics and kinetics during landing and walking/running tasks of ankle copers compared with patients with chronic ankle instability and controls.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We systematically searched PubMed, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science. Tri-planar lower extremity biomechanics (joint angle and moment at maximum and initial contact, and joint displacement) were synthesized using standard mean difference and 95 % confidence intervals. We assessed methodological quality, study heterogeneity, and publication bias.</div></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><div>We identified 13 studies. Pooled evidence indicated that copers had less inversion and eversion angles, and ankle frontal displacement during landing compared with patients with chronic ankle instability (|standard mean difference| 0.31–0.40). Copers revealed greater dorsiflexion, plantarflexion, and ankle sagittal displacement during landing and less plantarflexion moment during walking than patients with chronic ankle instability (|standard mean difference| 0.29–0.46); however, most ankle biomechanics of copers were not significantly different from those of controls. In the proximal joints, copers revealed less knee valgus angle at maximum and initial contact (|standard mean difference| 0.25–0.33); and less hip flexion angle at maximum and initial contact, hip external rotation angle and sagittal and frontal displacement during landing (standard mean difference 0.49–0.73) than patients with chronic ankle instability. Copers had less hip extension moment during walking and greater maximum hip adduction angle during landing than controls (|standard mean difference| 0.66–0.77).</div></div><div><h3>Interpretations</h3><div>Our results provide insight into the lower extremity biomechanics of copers during dynamic tasks, contributing injury coping mechanisms and developing rehabilitation programs to return to sports.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50992,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Biomechanics","volume":"122 ","pages":"Article 106437"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Biomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0268003325000099","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

We aimed to synthesize the kinematics and kinetics during landing and walking/running tasks of ankle copers compared with patients with chronic ankle instability and controls.

Methods

We systematically searched PubMed, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science. Tri-planar lower extremity biomechanics (joint angle and moment at maximum and initial contact, and joint displacement) were synthesized using standard mean difference and 95 % confidence intervals. We assessed methodological quality, study heterogeneity, and publication bias.

Findings

We identified 13 studies. Pooled evidence indicated that copers had less inversion and eversion angles, and ankle frontal displacement during landing compared with patients with chronic ankle instability (|standard mean difference| 0.31–0.40). Copers revealed greater dorsiflexion, plantarflexion, and ankle sagittal displacement during landing and less plantarflexion moment during walking than patients with chronic ankle instability (|standard mean difference| 0.29–0.46); however, most ankle biomechanics of copers were not significantly different from those of controls. In the proximal joints, copers revealed less knee valgus angle at maximum and initial contact (|standard mean difference| 0.25–0.33); and less hip flexion angle at maximum and initial contact, hip external rotation angle and sagittal and frontal displacement during landing (standard mean difference 0.49–0.73) than patients with chronic ankle instability. Copers had less hip extension moment during walking and greater maximum hip adduction angle during landing than controls (|standard mean difference| 0.66–0.77).

Interpretations

Our results provide insight into the lower extremity biomechanics of copers during dynamic tasks, contributing injury coping mechanisms and developing rehabilitation programs to return to sports.

查看原文本刊更多论文

在着陆和行走/跑步任务中应对外侧踝关节扭伤的个体的运动学和动力学特征：一项带有荟萃分析的系统综述。

背景：我们的目的是综合踝关节处理者在着陆和行走/跑步任务中的运动学和动力学，并与慢性踝关节不稳定和控制的患者进行比较。方法：系统地检索PubMed、CINAHL、SPORTDiscus和Web of Science。采用标准均值差和95%置信区间合成三平面下肢生物力学（最大接触和初始接触时关节角度和力矩以及关节位移）。我们评估了方法学质量、研究异质性和发表偏倚。研究结果：我们确定了13项研究。综合证据表明，与慢性踝关节不稳定患者相比，踝关节内翻角度和外翻角度更小，踝关节在着陆时的前移位也更小（标准平均差| 0.31-0.40）。结果显示，与慢性踝关节不稳定患者相比，着陆时踝关节背屈、跖屈和矢状位移更大，行走时跖屈力矩更小（标准平均差| 0.29-0.46）；然而，大多数踝关节生物力学与对照组没有显著差异。在近端关节，铜铜在最大接触和初始接触时显示较小的膝外翻角（|标准平均差为0.25-0.33）；与慢性踝关节不稳患者相比，最大和初始接触时髋关节屈曲角、髋关节外旋角和着地时矢状位和额位位移更小（标准平均差0.49-0.73）。与对照组相比，实验组患者行走时髋部伸展力矩更小，着地时髋部最大内收角更大（标准平均差| 0.66-0.77）。解释：我们的研究结果为动态任务中运动员的下肢生物力学提供了见解，有助于损伤应对机制和制定重返运动的康复计划。

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

Clinical Biomechanics 医学-工程：生物医学

CiteScore

3.30

自引率

5.60%

发文量

189

审稿时长

12.3 weeks

期刊介绍： Clinical Biomechanics is an international multidisciplinary journal of biomechanics with a focus on medical and clinical applications of new knowledge in the field. The science of biomechanics helps explain the causes of cell, tissue, organ and body system disorders, and supports clinicians in the diagnosis, prognosis and evaluation of treatment methods and technologies. Clinical Biomechanics aims to strengthen the links between laboratory and clinic by publishing cutting-edge biomechanics research which helps to explain the causes of injury and disease, and which provides evidence contributing to improved clinical management. A rigorous peer review system is employed and every attempt is made to process and publish top-quality papers promptly. Clinical Biomechanics explores all facets of body system, organ, tissue and cell biomechanics, with an emphasis on medical and clinical applications of the basic science aspects. The role of basic science is therefore recognized in a medical or clinical context. The readership of the journal closely reflects its multi-disciplinary contents, being a balance of scientists, engineers and clinicians. The contents are in the form of research papers, brief reports, review papers and correspondence, whilst special interest issues and supplements are published from time to time. Disciplines covered include biomechanics and mechanobiology at all scales, bioengineering and use of tissue engineering and biomaterials for clinical applications, biophysics, as well as biomechanical aspects of medical robotics, ergonomics, physical and occupational therapeutics and rehabilitation.