Comparison of the effect of semi-rigid ankle bracing on performance among injured v. non-injured adolescent female hockey players

Authors

  • Terry Jeremy Ellapen Department of Biokinetics, Exercise and Leisure Sciences, School of Health Science, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Westville, South Africa
  • N Acampora Department of Biokinetics, Exercise and Leisure Sciences, School of Health Science, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Westville, South Africa
  • S Dawson Department of Biokinetics, Exercise and Leisure Sciences, School of Health Science, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Westville, South Africa
  • J Arling Department of Biokinetics, Exercise and Leisure Sciences, School of Health Science, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Westville, South Africa
  • C van Niekerk Department of Biokinetics, Exercise and Leisure Sciences, School of Health Science, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Westville, South Africa
  • H J van Heerden Department of Biokinetics, Exercise and Leisure Sciences, School of Health Science, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Westville, South Africa

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7196/sajsm.517

Keywords:

Epidemiology, Hockey, Proprioception, Ankle, Bracing

Abstract

Objective. To determine the comparative proprioceptive performance of injured v. non-injured adolescent female hockey players wearing an ankle brace.

Methods. Data were collected from 100 high school players who belonged to the Highway Secondary School Hockey League, KwaZulu-Natal, via voluntary parental informed consent and player assent. Players completed an injury questionnaire probing the prevalence and nature of hockey injuries (March - August 2013). Subsequently, players completed a Biodex proprioceptive test with and without an ankle brace. Probability was set at p≤0.05.

Results. Twenty-two players sustained ankle injuries within the 6-month study period (p<0.001). Injured players performed similarly without bracing (right anterior posterior index (RAPI) 2.8 (standard deviation (SD) 0.9); right medial lateral index (RMLI) 1.9 (0.7); left anterior posterior index (LAPI) 2.7 (0.9); left medial lateral index (LMLI) 1.7 (0.6)) compared with bracing (RAPI 2.7 (1.4); RMLI 1.8 (0.6); LAPI 2.6 (1.0); LMLI 1.5 (0.6)) (p>0.05). However, bracing improved the ankle stability of the non-injured group (RAPI 2.2 (0.8); RMLI 1.5 (0.5); LAPI 2.4 (0.9); RMLI 1.5 (0.5)) compared with their performance without a brace (RAPI 2.5 (1.0); RMLI 1.8 (0.8); LAPI 2.8 (1.1); LMLI 1.8 (0.6)) (p<0.05).

Conclusion. Ankle bracing did not enhance the stability of injured ankles. However, ankle bracing has an ergogenic effect that enhances the stability of healthy ankles.

Downloads

Author Biographies

  • Terry Jeremy Ellapen, Department of Biokinetics, Exercise and Leisure Sciences, School of Health Science, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Westville, South Africa
    PhD
  • N Acampora, Department of Biokinetics, Exercise and Leisure Sciences, School of Health Science, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Westville, South Africa
    BSps Hons (Biokinetics)
  • S Dawson, Department of Biokinetics, Exercise and Leisure Sciences, School of Health Science, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Westville, South Africa
    BSps Hons (Biokinetics)
  • J Arling, Department of Biokinetics, Exercise and Leisure Sciences, School of Health Science, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Westville, South Africa
    BSps Hons (Biokinetics)
  • C van Niekerk, Department of Biokinetics, Exercise and Leisure Sciences, School of Health Science, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Westville, South Africa
    BSps Hons (Biokinetics)
  • H J van Heerden, Department of Biokinetics, Exercise and Leisure Sciences, School of Health Science, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Westville, South Africa
    D Phil

Downloads

Published

2014-10-15

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Ellapen, T. J., Acampora, N., Dawson, S., Arling, J., van Niekerk, C., & van Heerden, H. J. (2014). Comparison of the effect of semi-rigid ankle bracing on performance among injured v. non-injured adolescent female hockey players. South African Journal of Sports Medicine, 26(3), 73-76. https://doi.org/10.7196/sajsm.517
Views
  • Abstract 522
  • PDF 490