Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorThompson, Cassandra
dc.contributor.authorSchabrun, Siobhan
dc.contributor.authorRomero, Rick
dc.contributor.authorBialocerkowski, Andrea
dc.contributor.authorvan Dieen, Jaap
dc.contributor.authorMarshall, Paul
dc.date.accessioned2019-07-06T12:30:24Z
dc.date.available2019-07-06T12:30:24Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.identifier.issn0112-1642
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s40279-017-0781-4
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/369036
dc.description.abstractBackground: Many factors are thought to contribute to chronic ankle instability (CAI). Multiple systematic reviews have synthesised the available evidence to identify the primary contributing factors. However, readers are now faced with several systematic reviews that present conflicting findings. Objective: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to establish the statistical significance and effect size of primary factors contributing to CAI and to identify likely reasons for inconsistencies in the literature. Methods: Relevant health databases were searched: CINAHL, MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus and SPORTDiscus. Systematic reviews were included if they answered a focused research question, clearly defined the search strategy criteria and study selection/inclusion and completed a comprehensive search of the literature. Included reviews needed to be published in a peer-reviewed journal and needed to review observational studies of factors and/or characteristics of persons with CAI, with or without meta-analysis. There was no language restriction. Studies using a non-systematic review methodology (e.g. primary studies and narrative reviews) were excluded. Methodological quality of systematic reviews was assessed using the modified R-AMSTAR tool. Meta-analysis on included primary studies was performed. Results: Only 17% of primary studies measured a clearly defined CAI population. There is strong evidence to support the contribution of dynamic balance, peroneal reaction time and eversion strength deficits and moderate evidence for proprioception and static balance deficits to non-specific ankle instability. Conclusions: Evidence from previous systematic reviews does not accurately reflect the CAI population. For treatment of non-specific ankle instability, clinicians should focus on dynamic balance, reaction time and strength deficits; however, these findings may not be translated to the CAI population. Research should be updated with an adequately controlled CAI population.
dc.description.peerreviewedYes
dc.languageEnglish
dc.publisherSpringer
dc.publisher.placeNew Zealand
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom189
dc.relation.ispartofpageto205
dc.relation.ispartofissue1
dc.relation.ispartofjournalSports Medicine
dc.relation.ispartofvolume48
dc.subject.fieldofresearchHuman Movement and Sports Science not elsewhere classified
dc.subject.fieldofresearchHuman Movement and Sports Sciences
dc.subject.fieldofresearchMechanical Engineering
dc.subject.fieldofresearchCurriculum and Pedagogy
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode110699
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode1106
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode0913
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode1302
dc.titleFactors Contributing to Chronic Ankle Instability: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Systematic Reviews
dc.typeJournal article
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Articles
dc.type.codeC - Journal Articles
dc.description.versionPost-print
gro.rights.copyright© 2018 Springer. This is an electronic version of an article published in Sports Medicine, Volume 48, Issue 1, pp 189–205, 2018. Sports Medicine is available online at: http://link.springer.com/ with the open URL of your article.
gro.hasfulltextFull Text
gro.griffith.authorBialocerkowski, Andrea E.


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record