Article Title



Ankle injuries are common amongst athletes and sedentary individuals. Specifically, ankle sprains account for up to 73% of all ankle injuries and have functional consequences including ankle instability and sprain reoccurrence. Two common treatments are bracing and ankle taping with athletic tape. Due to large restrictions in ankle range of motion as well as discomfort, there has been an interest in seeking another effective treatment, leading to the development of kinesiotape (KT), which claims to promote greater internal stability and joint awareness. PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness of KT and bracing (B) on recent ankle sprains in terms of proprioception and internal stabilization. METHODS: Fifteen male subjects (21.1 ± 1.1), who experienced an ankle sprain within the last six months, participated in the study. Subjects completed one trial with KT, one with a brace, and one with placebo tape (athletic tape, AT). The blindfolded individual stood barefoot on the affected ankle for ten seconds. The average muscle activation of the lateral gastrocnemius, peroneus longus, and the tibialis anterior were measured. The subject then sat in a chair, blindfolded, and placed the injured ankle on a core stability board. A researcher rotated the board from neutral position into 5° of plantarflexion (PF), 5° of dorsiflexion (DF), 5° of inversion (INV), and 5° of eversion (EV). The subject then walked for two minutes on a treadmill at a self-selected pace. Afterwards, as the researcher rotated the board, the subject estimated when he believed his ankle had reached the targeted angle for each motion. This was repeated with 10° of each motion. A repeated measures ANOVA was used to analyze the acquired data. RESULTS: Upon application of AT and KT, subjects estimated the target angle to be 4.33° and 4.23° during 5° PF (p=0.017, p=0.044), and estimated 5.7° and 6.03° during INV (p=0.017, p=0.21). Subjects had approximated 6.10° during 5° INV (p=0.041) and 6.13° during EV (p=0.025) upon application of B. There were no effects seen for any intervention on proprioception of 10°. Muscle activity did not differ from the control with the implementation of the treatments, except for B on the tibialis anterior (p<0.05), which increased by 59.1% relative to the control. CONCLUSION: KT tape and ankle bracing are not different in promoting internal stability and joint awareness.

This document is currently not available here.