The effect of movement representation techniques on ankle function and performance in persons with or without a lateral ankle sprain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Lateral ankle sprains are highly prevalent and result in tissue damage, impairments of muscle strength, instability, and muscle activation. Up to 74% will experience ongoing symptoms after a lateral ankle sprain. In healthy subjects, motor imagery might induce neural changes in the somatosensory and motor areas of the brain, yielding favourable enhancements in muscular force. However, during motor imagery, difficulties in building a motor image, no somatosensory feedback, and the absence of structural changes at the level of the muscle might explain the differences found between motor imagery and physical practice. In rehabilitation, motor imagery might be supportive in rebuilding motor networks or creating new networks to restore impairments in muscle activation and movement patterns. This systematic review was undertaken to summarize the current body of evidence about the effect on motor imagery, or action observation, on lower leg strength, muscle performance, ankle range of motion, balance, and edema in persons with, and without, a lateral ankle sprain compared to usual care, a placebo intervention, or no intervention. METHODS: A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was conducted in healthy participants and participants with a lateral ankle sprain. Motor imagery or action observation in isolation, or in combination with usual care were compared to a placebo intervention, or no intervention. An electronic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cinahl, Psychinfo, Sportdiscus, Web of Science, Cochrane and Google Scholar was conducted, and articles published up to 7th June 2023 were included. Two reviewers individually screened titles and abstracts for relevancy using the inclusion criteria. Variables related to muscle strength, muscle function, range of motion, balance, return to sports tests, or questionnaires on self-reported function or activities were extracted. A risk of bias assessment was done using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool II by two reviewers. Meta-analysis using a random effects model was performed when two or more studies reported the same outcome measures. The Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) was calculated over the change from baseline scores. Review manager 5.4 was used to perform analysis of subgroup differences and test for statistically significant differences. Confidence intervals were visually checked for overlap between subgroups. RESULTS: Nine studies, six examining healthy participants and three examining participants with an acute lateral ankle sprain, were included. All studies were rated with moderate to high risk of bias overall. Quality of the motor imagery interventions differed largely between studies. Meta-analysis showed a large and significant effect of motor imagery on lower leg strength (SMD 1.47, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.50); however, the evidence was downgraded to very low certainty due to substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 73%), limitations in the studies (some concerns in risk of bias in all studies), and imprecision (n = < 300). Evidence showed no association with ankle range of motion (SMD 0.25, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.93), edema (SMD -1.11, 95% CI -1.60 to 3.81), the anterior reach direction of the Star Excursion Balance Test (SEBT) (SMD 0.73, 95% CI -0.62 to 2.08), the posterolateral direction (SMD 0.32, 95% CI -0.94 to 1.57), and the posteromedial direction (SMD 0.52, 95% CI -0.07 to 1.10). The certainty of evidence for the different comparisons was very low. CONCLUSIONS: There is a low certainty, significant, positive effect for motor imagery being able to improve lower leg muscle strength in healthy participants. The effect on balance, range of motion and edema was uncertain and of very low certainty. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021243258.