Ground reaction forces and EMG activity with ankle bracing during inversion stress

被引:31
作者
Cordova, ML [1 ]
Armstrong, CW
Rankin, JM
Yeasting, RA
机构
[1] Indiana State Univ, Athlet Training Dept, Terre Haute, IN 47809 USA
[2] Univ Toledo, Dept Hlth Promot & Human Performance, Toledo, OH 43606 USA
[3] Med Coll Ohio, Dept Anat & Neurobiol, Toledo, OH 43699 USA
关键词
ankle prophylaxes; joint forces; electromyography; dynamic inversion loading;
D O I
10.1097/00005768-199809000-00004
中图分类号
G8 [体育];
学科分类号
04 ; 0403 ;
摘要
Purpose: The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the effects of external ankle support on ground reaction forces and myoelectrical activity of selected lower extremity muscles during dynamic inversion stress. Methods: Twenty-four healthy males performed five trials of a lateral dynamic movement at a rate between 80-90% of their maximal speed under three ankle brace conditions (no brace-control, Aircast Sport-Stirrup, Active Ankle). Ground reaction forces along the mediolateral axis and EMG activity of the peroneus longus, tibialis anterior, and medial gastrocnemius were simultaneously recorded during force plate contact. Results: Ankle bracing did not affect peak impact force (P > 0.05), maximum loading force (P > 0.05), or peak propulsion force (P > 0.05) in the lateral direction compared with the control condition. Ankle bracing reduced the EMG activity of the peroneus longus during peak impact force compared with the control condition (P < 0.05), although no differences were noted between the two braces. Furthermore, peroneous longus activity during maximum loading force and peak propulsion remained unaffected (P < 0.05). Ankle bracing did not affect the EMG activity of the tibialis anterior and medial gastrocnemius at the point of peak impact force, maximum loading force (P > 0.05), and peak propulsion force (P > 0.05). Conclusions: These data suggest that ankle bracing may not affect the forces experienced at the foot and ankle, bur helps reduce the strain placed on the peroneus longus during peak impact force. Furthermore, ankle bracing does not alter the function of the tibialis anterior and medial gastrocnemius during dynamic inversion stress.
引用
收藏
页码:1363 / 1370
页数:8
相关论文
共 40 条
[1]   THE ROLE OF EXTERNAL NONRIGID ANKLE BRACING IN LIMITING ANKLE INVERSION [J].
ANDERSON, DL ;
SANDERSON, DJ ;
HENNIG, EM .
CLINICAL JOURNAL OF SPORT MEDICINE, 1995, 5 (01) :18-24
[2]  
ANDERSON MK, 1995, SPORTS INJURY MANAGE, P243
[3]   INCIDENCE AND MECHANISMS OF ACUTE ANKLE INVERSION INJURIES IN VOLLEYBALL - A RETROSPECTIVE COHORT STUDY [J].
BAHR, R ;
KARLSEN, R ;
LIAN, O ;
OVREBO, RV .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 1994, 22 (05) :595-600
[4]   ANKLE INVERSION INJURY AND HYPERMOBILITY - EFFECT ON HIP AND ANKLE MUSCLE ELECTROMYOGRAPHY ONSET LATENCY [J].
BECKMAN, SM ;
BUCHANAN, TS .
ARCHIVES OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION, 1995, 76 (12) :1138-1143
[5]  
Beriau Mark R., 1994, Journal of Athletic Training, V29, P224
[6]  
DELAGI EFV, 1981, ANATOMIC GUIDE ELECT, P146
[7]  
Garrick J G, 1977, Am J Sports Med, V5, P241, DOI 10.1177/036354657700500606
[8]  
Garrick J G, 1982, Clin Sports Med, V1, P13
[9]  
GARRICK JG, 1988, CLIN SPORT MED, V7, P29
[10]  
GARRICK JG, 1985, PHYSICIAN SPORTSMED, V13, P4