Differences and relationships between weightbearing and non-weightbearing dorsiflexion range of motion in foot and ankle injuries

被引：3

作者：

Koshino, Yuta ^{[1
]}

Takabayashi, Tomoya ^{[2
]}

Akuzawa, Hiroshi ^{[2
]}

Mizota, Takeshi ^{[3
]}

Numasawa, Shun ^{[4
]}

Kobayashi, Takumi ^{[5
]}

Kudo, Shintarou ^{[6
,7
,8
]}

Hikita, Yoshiki ^{[9
]}

Akiyoshi, Naoki ^{[10
]}

Edama, Mutsuaki ^{[2
]}

机构：

[1] Hokkaido Univ, Fac Hlth Sci, Kita 12, Nishi 5, Kita Ku, Sapporo 0600812, Japan

[2] Niigata Univ Hlth & Welf, Inst Human Movement & Med Sci, Niigata, Japan

[3] Soejima Orthoped Hosp, Dept Rehabil, Takeo, Saga, Japan

[4] Takarazuka Univ Med & Hlth Care, Dept Rehabil, Takarazuka, Japan

[5] Hokkaido Chitose Coll Rehabil, Fac Hlth Sci, Chitose, Japan

[6] Morinomiya Univ Med Sci, Inclus Med Sci Res Inst, Osaka, Japan

[7] Morinomiya Univ Med Sci, Grad Sch Hlth Sci, Osaka, Japan

[8] AR Ex Med Res Ctr, Tokyo, Japan

[9] Aruck Lab, Osaka, Japan

[10] J Med Oyumino, Dept Rehabil, Chiba, Japan

来源：

JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY AND RESEARCH | 2024年 / 19卷 / 01期

关键词：

Ankle injury; Foot injury; Range of motion; Flexibility; Stiffness; INTERVENTION; INDIVIDUALS; RELIABILITY; KINEMATICS; MOVEMENT; STRENGTH; KNEE;

D O I：

10.1186/s13018-024-04599-x

中图分类号：

R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学（修复外科学）];

学科分类号：

摘要：

Background This study aimed to: (1) identify assessment methods that can detect greater ankle dorsiflexion range of motion (DROM) limitation in the injured limb; (2) determine whether differences in weightbearing measurements exist even in the absence of DROM limitations in the injured limb according to non-weightbearing measurements; and (3) examine associations between DROM in the weightbearing and non-weightbearing positions and compare those between a patient group with foot and ankle injuries and a healthy group. Methods Eighty-two patients with foot and ankle injuries (e.g., fractures, ligament and tendon injuries) and 49 healthy individuals participated in this study. Non-weightbearing DROM was measured under two different conditions: prone position with knee extended and prone position with knee flexed. Weightbearing DROM was measured as the tibia inclination angle (weightbearing angle) and distance between the big toe and wall (weightbearing distance) at maximum dorsiflexion. The effects of side (injured, uninjured) and measurement method on DROM in the patient groups were assessed using two-way repeated -measures ANOVA and t -tests. Pearson correlations between measurements were assessed. In addition, we analyzed whether patients without non-weightbearing DROM limitation (<= 3 degrees) showed limitations in weightbearing DROM using t -tests with Bonferroni correction. Results DROM in patient groups differed significantly between legs with all measurement methods (all: P < 0.001), with the largest effect size for weightbearing angle (d = 0.95). Patients without non-weightbearing DROM limitation (n = 37) displayed significantly smaller weightbearing angle and weightbearing distance on the injured side than on the uninjured side (P < 0.001 each), with large effect sizes (d = 0.97-1.06). Correlation coefficients between DROM in non-weightbearing and weightbearing positions were very weak (R = 0.17, P = 0.123) to moderate (R = 0.26-0.49, P < 0.05) for the patient group, and moderate to strong for the healthy group (R = 0.51-0.69, P < 0.05). Conclusions DROM limitations due to foot and ankle injuries may be overlooked if measurements are only taken in the non-weightbearing position and should also be measured in the weightbearing position. Furthermore, DROM measurements in non-weightbearing and weightbearing positions may assess different characteristics, particularly in patient group.

引用

页数：8

共 26 条

[1] Serial Within-Session Improvements in Ankle Dorsiflexion During Clinical Interventions Including Mobilization-With-Movement and A Novel Manipulation Intervention - A Case Series [J].