Scholarlink

Purpose <p>This study aims to compare the effect of proprioceptive training vs. agility training on functional performance and balance parameters among chronic ankle instability (CAI) patients.</p> Methods <p>The investigators conducted a single-blind block-randomized trial at a tertiary health facility in southern Thailand. The investigators randomly assigned participants to either Agility or Proprioceptive training groups, completing 30-min sessions three times a week for 6&#xa0;weeks.&#xa0;Participants underwent functional and balance tests and reported their stability level and the occurrence of recurrent ankle sprains over 6&#xa0;months. The investigators used linear mixed models to evaluate the effects of group, time, and group × time interactions on outcome measures. Fisher’s exact test was used for categorical variables.</p> Results <p>Of 50 volunteers, 44 met the inclusion criteria (22 per group). Both groups improved significantly across all functional performance and balance outcomes following the 6-week intervention (all <i>p</i> &lt; .05), with no significant between-group differences across the majority of outcomes (all <i>p</i> &gt; .05). A significant time × group interaction was observed for triple hop for distance, favoring the Proprioceptive group (<i>B</i> = 33.77, 95% CI [3.64, 63.90], <i>p</i> = .029). The Agility group improved across all Y balance directions, whereas the Proprioceptive group did not improve in anterior reach. A trend toward greater subjective ankle stability was observed in the Proprioceptive group (27.3% vs. 4.5%; <i>p</i> = .051).</p> Conclusions <p>Both agility and proprioceptive training are effective rehabilitation strategies for patients with CAI, each offering distinct advantages depending on rehabilitation goals. A combined approach may represent the optimal strategy.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

The effect of proprioceptive training vs. agility training on functional performance and balance parameters among patients with chronic ankle instability: a randomized controlled trial

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月31日

查看全文
  • Tippawan Kaewmanee,
  • Jedsadakorn Kamransuek,
  • Praphassorn Khawplod,
  • Jirapa Maneerat,
  • Nutjiya Chaikul,
  • Sirirat Tohpreecha,
  • Chanon Kongkamol,
  • Korakot Maliwankul,
  • Wit Wichaidit

摘要

Purpose

This study aims to compare the effect of proprioceptive training vs. agility training on functional performance and balance parameters among chronic ankle instability (CAI) patients.

Methods

The investigators conducted a single-blind block-randomized trial at a tertiary health facility in southern Thailand. The investigators randomly assigned participants to either Agility or Proprioceptive training groups, completing 30-min sessions three times a week for 6 weeks. Participants underwent functional and balance tests and reported their stability level and the occurrence of recurrent ankle sprains over 6 months. The investigators used linear mixed models to evaluate the effects of group, time, and group × time interactions on outcome measures. Fisher’s exact test was used for categorical variables.

Results

Of 50 volunteers, 44 met the inclusion criteria (22 per group). Both groups improved significantly across all functional performance and balance outcomes following the 6-week intervention (all p < .05), with no significant between-group differences across the majority of outcomes (all p > .05). A significant time × group interaction was observed for triple hop for distance, favoring the Proprioceptive group (B = 33.77, 95% CI [3.64, 63.90], p = .029). The Agility group improved across all Y balance directions, whereas the Proprioceptive group did not improve in anterior reach. A trend toward greater subjective ankle stability was observed in the Proprioceptive group (27.3% vs. 4.5%; p = .051).

Conclusions

Both agility and proprioceptive training are effective rehabilitation strategies for patients with CAI, each offering distinct advantages depending on rehabilitation goals. A combined approach may represent the optimal strategy.