Observation of therapeutic effect of neuromuscular joint facilitation on functional ankle instability
10.3760/cma.j.cn101721-20210805-000053
- VernacularTitle:神经肌肉关节促进法治疗功能性踝关节不稳的效果观察
- Author:
Hongyu FAN
1
;
Xiaoxue ZHANG
;
Jinzhi WANG
;
Na DOU
Author Information
1. 华北理工大学护理与康复学院，唐山 063210
- Keywords:
Neuromuscular joint facilitation;
Ankle;
Balance;
Stability;
Cruamberland ankle instability tool
- From:
Clinical Medicine of China
2022;38(1):40-47
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To observe the intervention effect of neuromuscular joint facilitation (NJF)in patients with functional ankle instability (FAI).Methods:Fifty-three FAI subjects from North China University of Science and Technology from October 2020 to January 2021 were selected by cruamberland ankle instability tool (CAIT). According to the computer random number method, the 53 subjects were randomly divided into the control group (27 cases) and NJF group (26 cases). The control group received routine rehabilitation training, while the NJF group received NJF manipulation intervention on the basis of routine rehabilitation training. Before intervention and 8 weeks after intervention,ankle joint isokinetic muscle strength (invertor\evertor relative reak tergue) and the ratio of invertor to evertor of subjects in the two groups was evaluated and compared by Biodex isokinetic test training system, and the static balance ability of subjects in the two groups was evaluated and compared by Tecnobody balance instrument,and the dynamic balance ability of subjects in the two groups was evaluated and compared by star excursion balance test (SEBT), and the two groups were recorded and compared using the CAIT. A prospective cohort study was used. The measurement data of normal distribution are expressed by ± s. The mean between the two groups is compared by independent sample t-test, and the comparison before and after Intervention in the group is compared by paired t-test; The counting data were expressed in cases (%), and the comparison between groups was adopted χ 2 inspection. Results:After intervention, the NJF group at 60°/s angular velocity: invertor relative reak tergue (30.28±5.17) 0%, evertor relative reak tergue (28.93±5.15)%, the ratio of invertor to evertor (1.05±0.08) and 180°/s angular velocity: invertor relative reak tergue (27.17±5.24)%, evertor relative reak tergue (24.62±3.57)%, the ratio of invertor to evertor (1.10±0.12) were better than control group (27.05±5.95)%, (23.90±3.81)%, (1.13±0.15) and (24.12±5.36)%, (20.35±3.74)%, (1.19±0.18), and the differences were statistically significant ( t value were 2.11, 4.06, 2.35, 2.09, 4.25, 2.10, respectively; P value were 0.040, <0.001, 0.024, 0.042, <0.001, 0.040, respectively). After intervention, average AP speed of COP in the NJF group (open eyes: (23.19±5.25) mm/s; closed eyes: (65.65±10.51) mm/s), average ML speed of COP (open eyes: (23.73±4.73) mm/s; closed eyes: (72.08±10.28) mm/s), ellipse area of COP (open eyes: (913.77±348.90) mm 2; closed eyes: (3 271.65±1 024.48) mm 2) and perimeter of COP (open eyes: (845.04±146.68) mm; closed eyes: (2 055.42±548.89) mm) were lower than those of the control group (26.41±4.89) mm/s, (71.52±9.85) mm/s, (27.56±7.68) mm/s, (78.67±11.74) mm/s, (1 174.33±424.20) mm 2, (3 989.41±1 410.00) mm 2, (1 041.93±291.28) mm, (2 490.93±541.94) mm, the differences were statistically significant ( t value were 2.31, 2.10, 2.17, 2.17, 2.44, 2.11, 3.13, 2.97, respectively; P value were 0.025, 0.041, 0.034, 0.035, 0.018, 0.040, 0.003, 0.005, respectively). After intervention,the 8 directions of SEBT scores in the NJF group:Anterior (73.16±6.04)%, Anterolateral (65.90±5.54)%, Lateral (74.36±7.77)%, Posterolateral (88.05±6.76)%, Posterior (83.31±6.64)%, Posteromedial (86.01±7.62)%, Medial (77.39±8.44)% and Anteromedial (72.36±6.74)% were all higher than the control group (67.65±6.03)%, (61.08±5.96)%, (67.72±8.28)%, (78.33±8.06)%, (76.22±8.71)%, (79.31±7.24)%, (71.36±7.00)%, and (67.12±7.21)%,the differences were statistically significant ( t value were 3.32, 3.05, 3.01, 4.75, 3.33, 3.28, 2.83, 2.73, respectively; P value were 0.002 ,0.004, 0.004, <0.001, 0.002, 0.002, 0.007, 0.009, respectively). After intervention, the CAIT score of NJF group (23.04±3.96) points was higher than that of control group (19.15±3.56) points, and the difference was statistically significant ( t=3.76, P<0.001). Conclusion:NJF can significantly improve the internal and external muscle strength of the ankle joint and enhance the coordination of the internal and external muscle group, and effectively improve the static and dynamic balance ability of FAI patients.
