Influence of Prophylactic Ankle Tapes on Lower Extremity Kinematics during Stop-jump in Chronic Ankle Instability

Abstract

Nuremous tape applications have been used with patients who suffer from chronic ankle instability (CAI). The goal is to control the increased mechanical laxity associated with their condition during dynamic activity. The effect of these prophylactic ankle tapings on lower extremity kinematics has not been fully identified at this time. PURPOSE: To investigate the effects of traditional tape (TT), fibular repositioning tape (FRT), and kinesiology tape (KT) on peak joint angles of the lower extremity in individuals with CAI. METHODS: 14 individuals with CAI (age: 24.07±4.46 years; height: 175.06±5.09 cm; weight: 82.24± 10.38 kg; CAIT = 17.64 ± 4.14; FAAM-ADL = 86.69 ± 6.71; FAAM-SS = 75.45 ± 6.70) participated in the study. The Foot and Ankle Ability Measure Activity of Daily Living (FAAM-ADL), the FAAM Sports Subscale (FAAM-SS), and the Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool (CAIT) were used to screen subjects for CAI. The order of application of the taping conditions (TT, FRT, and KT) was randomly assigned. Peak angles of the hip, knee, and ankle joint during a stop-jump task, with and without the tape application, were collected using a 3D motion capture system. The following peak angles were measured: hip flexion (Flex), hip adduction (ADD), hip internal rotation (IR), knee Flex, knee abduction (ABD), knee IR, ankle dorsiflexion (DF), ankle inversion (IV), and ankle ADD. To examine differences across the conditions (Baseline, TT, FRT, KT), a repeated measures ANOVA was performed. RESULTS: A statistically significant difference in peak angle of each joint across the conditions was not found (hip Flex.: F(3,39) = .85, p = .47; hip ADD: F(3,39) = 1.90, p = .15; hip IR: F(3,39) = .67, p = .58; knee Flex.: F(3,39) = 1.85, p = .15; knee ABD: F(3,39) = 1.02, p = .39; knee IR: F(3,39) = .44, p = .73; ankle DF: F(3,39) = .66, p = .58; ankle IV: F(3,39) = 0.85, p = .47; ankle ADD: F(3,39) = 2.23, p = .10). CONCLUSION: The application of different taping techniques did not significantly change peak joint angles of the lower extremity during a stop-jump task. The results contradict previous research suggesting ankle taping restricts joint range of motion. Therefore, further investigation is needed to examine the influence of different prophylactic ankle taping techniques on sports performance, as well as muscle activation, during dynamic tasks.