Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Rehabilitation Efficacy in Chronic Ankle Instability.

CONTEXT: There is minimal patient-oriented evidence regarding the effectiveness of interventions targeted to reduce symptoms associated with chronic ankle instability (CAI). Additionally, clinicians aiming to prioritize care by implementing only the most effective components of a rehabilitative program have very little evidence on comparative efficacy.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the comparative efficacy of two common ankle rehabilitation techniques [wobble board (WB) balance training and ankle strengthening using resistance tubing (RT)] using patient-oriented outcomes.

DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial.

SETTING: Laboratory.

PATIENTS: Forty patients with CAI were randomized into two treatment groups: RT and WB. CAI inclusion criteria included a history of an ankle sprain, recurrent giving way, and a Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool (CAIT) score ≤ 25.

INTERVENTIONS: Participants completed 5 clinician-oriented tests (Foot lift test, Time-in-balance, Star Excursion Balance Test, Figure of 8 hop, and Side hop) and 5 patient-oriented questionnaires [CAIT, Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) Activities of Daily Living (ADL) and FAAM Sport scale, Short-Form 36 (SF-36), and Global Rating of Function (GRF)]. Following baseline testing, participants completed 12 sessions over 4 weeks of graduated WB or RT exercise, then repeated baseline tests.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: For each patient- and clinician-oriented test, separate 2x2 RMANOVAs analyzed differences between groups over time (alpha set at P=0.05).

RESULTS: There was a significant interaction between group and time for the FAAM-ADL (P=0.043). Specifically, the WB group improved post intervention (P<0.001) whereas the RT group remained the same (P=0.294). There were no other significant interactions or significant differences between groups (all P>0.05). There were significant improvements post-intervention for the CAIT, FAAM-Sport, GRF, SF-36 and all 5 clinician-oriented tests (all P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS: A single exercise 4-week intervention can improve patient-and clinician-oriented outcomes in individuals with CAI. Limited evidence indicates that WB training was more effective than RT.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapy, level 1b.