Lijiang Luan, Jeremy Witchalls, Charlotte Ganderton, Roger Adams, Doa El-Ansary, Jia Han
{"title":"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。","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":"{\"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}","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
摘要
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。
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.
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.
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.