PTCohortJournal of physical therapy science2017

Gait abnormalities in patients with chronic ankle instability can improve following a non-invasive biomechanical therapy: a retrospective analysis.

Shay Tenenbaum, Ofir Chechik, Jason Bariteau and 6 others

PMID 28533609

WHAT IT FOUND

In 33 patients with chronic ankle instability, walking speed, step length, cadence, and ankle scores improved after 3 months using a foot-worn device.

They still walked differently from healthy controls, and no untreated group was included, so the device was not proven to work.

Key findings

01After three months of device use, patients with chronic ankle instability had improvements in walking velocity, cadence, step length, and single limb support on the symptomatic limb.

02Clinical outcome scores improved after treatment: SF-36 Physical score rose from 56.2 to 64.5, and total FAOS rose from 66.6 to 74.8, with all FAOS subcategories improving.

03Because there was no untreated group with chronic ankle instability, the study cannot show whether the device caused the improvements.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The data were collected retrospectively from one therapy center database, and all patients had been referred for treatment, so they may not represent all people with chronic ankle instability. There was no untreated group of patients with chronic ankle instability, so the study cannot determine whether the improvement was due to the device alone or other reasons. Follow-up was only three months, so it is unknown whether the gait and score improvements lasted or continued. Only spatiotemporal walking measures were collected, not detailed three-dimensional joint motion or muscle activity. Four patients had bilateral ankle instability, and the authors note this subgroup may have different compensation patterns. Healthy controls had missing Foot and Ankle Outcome Score data, limiting direct comparison of ankle scores. The authors state that a randomized controlled trial is needed to determine efficacy.

Declared interests

The study was not funded. Some authors hold shares in AposTherapy, and one author is a salaried employee of AposTherapy. Other named authors state they do not receive and are not entitled to financial compensation from AposTherapy.

The easy way to misread this

Do not conclude that AposTherapy caused the improvements. The study had no untreated group with chronic ankle instability, and the authors state that the improvement cannot be attributed to the treatment alone.

Read it on PubMed →