The effect of ankle supports on lower limb biomechanics during functional tasks: A systematic review with meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To systematically review the literature on the effects of ankle supports on lower extremity biomechanics during functional tasks. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis. METHODS: Eight electronic databases were searched from inception to July 2019. Studies of biomechanical outcomes during functional tasks that used a within-participant (repeated measures) design were included. Two independent reviewers screened studies, extracted data, assessed the methodological quality of the included studies and rated the quality of evidence. Meta-analysis was performed and reported as standardised mean differences and 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: A total of 8350 studies were identified in the electronic search and 42 studies involving a total of 761 participants were included in the review (21 studies included for qualitative reporting and 21 studies in the meta-analysis). Most individual studies and the meta-analyses demonstrated no effect of ankle supports on ground reaction force or ankle inversion angle. However, there was high quality evidence that ankle taping decreased plantarflexion angle at initial contact during landing from a height (P = 0.0009, standerdised mean differences = 0.72, 95% confidence intervals = 1.15, 0.03, I 2 = 3%). The effect of ankle supports on transverse plane ankle biomechanics has not been adequately investigated. CONCLUSIONS: Ankle taping only decreased plantarflexion angle at initial contact during landing from a jump. Ankle supports did not affect inversion angle or forces in linear and multiplanar tasks. There was insufficient evidence on the effect of ankle supports on ankle transverse plane biomechanics.

Evaluating the validity and reliability of inertial measurement units for determining knee and trunk kinematics during athletic landing and cutting movements.

Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs) are promising alternatives to laboratory-based motion capture methods in biomechanical assessment of athletic movements. The aim of this study was to investigate the validity of an IMU system for determining knee and trunk kinematics during landing and cutting tasks for clinical and research applications in sporting populations. Twenty-seven participants performed five cutting and landing tasks while being recorded using a gold-standard optoelectronic motion capture system and an IMU system. Intra-class coefficients, Pearson's r, root-mean-square error (RMSE), bias, and Bland-Altman limits of agreements between the motion capture and IMU systems were quantified for knee and trunk sagittal- and frontal-plane range-of-motion (ROM) and peak angles. Our results indicate that IMU validity was task-, joint-, and plane-dependent. Based on good-to-excellent (ICC) correlation, reasonable accuracy (RMSE < 5°), bias within 2°, and limits of agreements within 10°, we recommend the use of this IMU system for knee sagittal-plane ROM estimations during cutting, trunk sagittal-plane peak angle estimation during the double-leg landing task, trunk sagittal-plane ROM estimation for almost all tasks, and trunk frontal-plane peak angle estimation for the right single-leg landing task. Due to poor comparisons with the optoelectronic system, we do not recommend this IMU system for knee frontal-plane kinematic estimations.