Balance training does not alter reliance on visual information during static stance in those with chronic ankle instability : a systematic review with meta-analysis
|Title translated into German:||Gleichgewichtstraining verändert nicht die Abhängigkeit von visueller Information während statischer Haltung bei Patienten mit chronischer Sprunggelenkinstabilität : eine systematische Literaturübersicht mit Meta-Analyse|
|Author:||Song, Kyeongtak; Rhodes, Evan; Wikstrom, Erik A.|
|Published in:||Sports medicine|
|Published:||48 (2018), 4, S. 893–905, Lit.|
|Format:||Publications (Database SPOLIT)|
|Publication Type:||Journal article|
|Media type:||Electronic resource (online) Print resource|
Background: Visual, vestibular, and somatosensory systems contribute to postural control. Chronic ankle instability (CAI) patients have been observed to have a reduced ability to dynamically shift their reliance among sources of sensory information and rely more heavily on visual information during a single-limb stance relative to uninjured controls. Balance training is proven to improve postural control but there is a lack of evidence regarding the ability of balance training programs to alter the reliance on visual information in CAI patients.
Objective: Our objective was to determine if balance training alters the reliance on visual information during static stance in CAI patients.
Methods: The PubMed, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus databases were searched from their earliest available date to October 2017 using a combination of keywords. Study inclusion criteria consisted of (1) using participants with CAI; (2) use of a balance training intervention; and (3) calculation of an objective measure of static postural control during single-limb stance with eyes open and eyes closed. Sample sizes, means, and standard deviations of single-leg balance measures for eyes-open and eyes-closed testing conditions before and after balance training were extracted from the included studies. Eyes-open to eyes-closed effect sizes [Hedges’ g and 95% confidence intervals (CI)] before and after balance training were calculated, and between-study variability for heterogeneity and potential risks of publication bias were examined.
Results: Six studies were identified. The overall eyes-open to eyes-closed effect size difference between pre- and post-intervention assessments was not significant (Hedges’ g effect size = 0.151, 95% CI = − 0.151 to 0.453, p = 0.26). This result indicates that the utilization of visual information in individuals with CAI during the single-leg balance is not altered after balance training. Low heterogeneity (Q(5) = 2.96, p = 0.71, I 2 = 0%) of the included studies and no publication bias were found.
Conclusion: On the basis of our systematic review with meta-analysis, it appears that traditional balance training protocols do not alter the reliance on visual information used by CAI patients during a single-leg stance.