机械性和功能性踝关节不稳定的区别及应对措施:基于问卷的分析。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 REHABILITATION
Dong Wook Lee, Se Jong Kim, Jiho Kang, Kyeongtak Song, Sae Yong Lee
{"title":"机械性和功能性踝关节不稳定的区别及应对措施:基于问卷的分析。","authors":"Dong Wook Lee, Se Jong Kim, Jiho Kang, Kyeongtak Song, Sae Yong Lee","doi":"10.1123/jsr.2025-0070","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to differentiate subgroups of chronic ankle instability (CAI), including mechanical ankle instability (structural damage), functional ankle instability (FAI: neuromuscular deficits), Copers (individuals who recovered functional stability without recurrent symptoms), and controls (healthy individuals), using a validated questionnaire set (Cumberland ankle instability tool [CAIT], identification of functional ankle instability [IdFAI], ankle instability instrument [AII], foot and ankle ability measurement [FAAM]/Activities of Daily Living, FAAM/Sports). Additionally, we sought to present a standardized scoring system to classify CAI, Copers, and control participants.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Case-control study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 104 people participated in the study, including 26 mechanical ankle instability, 26 functional ankle instability, 26 Copers, and 26 healthy controls. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used for analysis, and the Mann-Whitney test was used for post hoc tests. The cutoff value for each group was confirmed using the receiver operating characteristic curve.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Analyses comparing the CAI, Copers, and control groups revealed significant differences in CAIT (P < .001), IdFAI (P < .001), AII (P < .001), FAAM/Activities of Daily Living (P < .001), and FAAM/Sports (P < .001). The cutoff values for each group were confirmed for CAIT, IdFAI, AII, FAAM/Activities of Daily Living, and FAAM/Sports. For CAIT, it was 0 to 8.5 mechanical ankle instability, 8.6 to 23 for functional ankle instability, 24 to 29.5 for Copers, and 29.6 to 30 for control.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings support using CAIT, IdFAI, and AII to classify CAI subtypes and identify Copers. Questionnaire-based cutoff values may assist rehabilitation planning and clinical decision-making. A CAIT score below 8.5 may indicate surgical consideration, supported by comprehensive clinical assessment.</p>","PeriodicalId":50041,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sport Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Discrimination Between Mechanical and Functional Ankle Instability, and Copers: A Questionnaire-Based Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Dong Wook Lee, Se Jong Kim, Jiho Kang, Kyeongtak Song, Sae Yong Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.1123/jsr.2025-0070\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to differentiate subgroups of chronic ankle instability (CAI), including mechanical ankle instability (structural damage), functional ankle instability (FAI: neuromuscular deficits), Copers (individuals who recovered functional stability without recurrent symptoms), and controls (healthy individuals), using a validated questionnaire set (Cumberland ankle instability tool [CAIT], identification of functional ankle instability [IdFAI], ankle instability instrument [AII], foot and ankle ability measurement [FAAM]/Activities of Daily Living, FAAM/Sports). Additionally, we sought to present a standardized scoring system to classify CAI, Copers, and control participants.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Case-control study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 104 people participated in the study, including 26 mechanical ankle instability, 26 functional ankle instability, 26 Copers, and 26 healthy controls. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used for analysis, and the Mann-Whitney test was used for post hoc tests. The cutoff value for each group was confirmed using the receiver operating characteristic curve.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Analyses comparing the CAI, Copers, and control groups revealed significant differences in CAIT (P < .001), IdFAI (P < .001), AII (P < .001), FAAM/Activities of Daily Living (P < .001), and FAAM/Sports (P < .001). The cutoff values for each group were confirmed for CAIT, IdFAI, AII, FAAM/Activities of Daily Living, and FAAM/Sports. For CAIT, it was 0 to 8.5 mechanical ankle instability, 8.6 to 23 for functional ankle instability, 24 to 29.5 for Copers, and 29.6 to 30 for control.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings support using CAIT, IdFAI, and AII to classify CAI subtypes and identify Copers. Questionnaire-based cutoff values may assist rehabilitation planning and clinical decision-making. A CAIT score below 8.5 may indicate surgical consideration, supported by comprehensive clinical assessment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50041,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Sport Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Sport Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1123/jsr.2025-0070\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Sport Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/jsr.2025-0070","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在区分慢性踝关节不稳定(CAI)的亚群,包括机械性踝关节不稳定(结构性损伤)、功能性踝关节不稳定(FAI):使用一套经过验证的问卷(Cumberland踝关节不稳定工具[CAIT]、功能性踝关节不稳定鉴定[IdFAI]、踝关节不稳定仪[AII]、足部和踝关节能力测量[FAAM]/日常生活活动,FAAM/Sports),受试者(恢复功能稳定且无复发症状的个体)和对照组(健康个体)。此外,我们试图提出一个标准化的评分系统来分类CAI、coper和对照参与者。设计:病例对照研究。方法:共104人参与研究,其中机械踝关节不稳定26人,功能性踝关节不稳定26人,Copers 26人,健康对照26人。分析采用Kruskal-Wallis检验,事后检验采用Mann-Whitney检验。采用受试者工作特征曲线确定各组的截止值。结果:比较CAI组、Copers组和对照组的分析显示,CAIT (P < 0.001)、IdFAI (P < 0.001)、AII (P < 0.001)、FAAM/日常生活活动(P < 0.001)和FAAM/运动(P < 0.001)有显著差异。确认各组CAIT、IdFAI、AII、FAAM/日常生活活动和FAAM/运动的截止值。对于CAIT,机械性踝关节不稳定评分为0 - 8.5分,功能性踝关节不稳定评分为8.6 - 23分,Copers评分为24 - 29.5分,对照组评分为29.6 - 30分。结论:本研究结果支持使用CAIT、IdFAI和AII对CAI亚型进行分类和鉴别。基于问卷的临界值可能有助于康复计划和临床决策。CAIT评分低于8.5分可能表明考虑手术,并有综合临床评估支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Discrimination Between Mechanical and Functional Ankle Instability, and Copers: A Questionnaire-Based Analysis.

Objective: This study aimed to differentiate subgroups of chronic ankle instability (CAI), including mechanical ankle instability (structural damage), functional ankle instability (FAI: neuromuscular deficits), Copers (individuals who recovered functional stability without recurrent symptoms), and controls (healthy individuals), using a validated questionnaire set (Cumberland ankle instability tool [CAIT], identification of functional ankle instability [IdFAI], ankle instability instrument [AII], foot and ankle ability measurement [FAAM]/Activities of Daily Living, FAAM/Sports). Additionally, we sought to present a standardized scoring system to classify CAI, Copers, and control participants.

Design: Case-control study.

Methods: A total of 104 people participated in the study, including 26 mechanical ankle instability, 26 functional ankle instability, 26 Copers, and 26 healthy controls. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used for analysis, and the Mann-Whitney test was used for post hoc tests. The cutoff value for each group was confirmed using the receiver operating characteristic curve.

Results: Analyses comparing the CAI, Copers, and control groups revealed significant differences in CAIT (P < .001), IdFAI (P < .001), AII (P < .001), FAAM/Activities of Daily Living (P < .001), and FAAM/Sports (P < .001). The cutoff values for each group were confirmed for CAIT, IdFAI, AII, FAAM/Activities of Daily Living, and FAAM/Sports. For CAIT, it was 0 to 8.5 mechanical ankle instability, 8.6 to 23 for functional ankle instability, 24 to 29.5 for Copers, and 29.6 to 30 for control.

Conclusion: These findings support using CAIT, IdFAI, and AII to classify CAI subtypes and identify Copers. Questionnaire-based cutoff values may assist rehabilitation planning and clinical decision-making. A CAIT score below 8.5 may indicate surgical consideration, supported by comprehensive clinical assessment.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Sport Rehabilitation
Journal of Sport Rehabilitation 医学-康复医学
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
5.90%
发文量
143
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Sport Rehabilitation (JSR) is your source for the latest peer-reviewed research in the field of sport rehabilitation. All members of the sports-medicine team will benefit from the wealth of important information in each issue. JSR is completely devoted to the rehabilitation of sport and exercise injuries, regardless of the age, gender, sport ability, level of fitness, or health status of the participant. JSR publishes peer-reviewed original research, systematic reviews/meta-analyses, critically appraised topics (CATs), case studies/series, and technical reports that directly affect the management and rehabilitation of injuries incurred during sport-related activities, irrespective of the individual’s age, gender, sport ability, level of fitness, or health status. The journal is intended to provide an international, multidisciplinary forum to serve the needs of all members of the sports medicine team, including athletic trainers/therapists, sport physical therapists/physiotherapists, sports medicine physicians, and other health care and medical professionals.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信