Abstract

Objective: To identify the most precise and consistent variables using joint repositioning for identifying joint position recognition (JPR) deficits in individuals with chronic ankle instability (CAI). Data Sources: We conducted a computerized search of the relevant scientific literature from January 1, 1965, to July 31, 2010, using PubMed Central, CINAHL, MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science. We also conducted hand searches of all retrieved studies to identify relevant citations. Included studies were written in English, involved human participants, and were published in peer-reviewed journals. Study Selection: Studies were included in the analysis if the authors (1) had examined JPR deficits in patients with CAI using active or passive repositioning techniques, (2) had made comparisons with a group or contralateral limb without CAI, and (3) had provided means and standard deviations for the calculation of effect sizes. Data Extraction: Studies were selected and coded independently and assessed for quality by the investigators. We evaluated 6 JPR variables: (1) study comparisons, (2) starting foot position, (3) repositioning method, (4) testing range of motion, (5) testing velocity, and (6) data-reduction method. The independent variable was group (CAI, control group or side without CAI). The dependent variable was errors committed during joint repositioning. Means and standard deviations for errors committed were extracted from each included study. Data Synthesis: Effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals were calculated to make comparisons across studies. Separate meta-analyses were calculated to determine the most precise and consistent method within each variable. Between-groups comparisons that involved active repositioning starting from a neutral position and moving into plantar flexion or inversion at a rate of less than 5°/s as measured by the mean absolute error committed appeared to be the most sensitive and precise variables for detecting JPR deficits in people with CAI. Verf.-Referat