Tag: recovery

Sensory Reweighting System Differences on Vestibular Feedback with Increased Task Constraints

Leave a comment

Blog Post Author Biography: Yuki Sugimoto is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Physical Therapy & Human Movement Science at the Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, and has a clinical background as a certified athletic trainer. One of Dr. Sugimoto’s research interests is the sensory reweighting system and changes in reliance on visual and vestibular feedback in individuals with chronic ankle instability.

Citation: Sugimoto YA, McKeon PO, Rhea CK, et al. Sensory Reweighting System Differences on Vestibular Feedback With Increased Task Constraints in Individuals With and Without Chronic Ankle Instability. J Athl Train. 2024;59(7):713-723. doi:10.4085/1062-6050-0246.22

Take-to-the-clinic message: The results highlight the importance of considering vestibular feedback reliance during postural control assessment and rehabilitation in individuals with chronic ankle instability (CAI). Combining tests such as the horizontal head impulse test with single-limb postural assessments may reveal underlying sensory reweighting dysfunction, especially under varying environmental and task conditions. Clinicians should explore multisensory feedback approaches that challenge vestibular function to improve rehabilitation outcomes in individuals with CAI.

Background: Postural stability is critical for motor behavior in dynamic environments and relies on the ability to reweight sensory feedback from somatosensory, visual, and vestibular systems as environmental and task constraints change. Individuals with CAI may have sensory reweighting deficits, leading to an over-reliance on visual feedback and difficulties maintaining postural control, especially in complex tasks like single-limb stance. However, current evidence suggests that somatosensory feedback contributions to postural control in individuals with CAI cannot be ruled out based solely on balance scores in single-limb stance with and without eyes closed. In addition, the sensory reweighting system in individuals with CAI and whether they upweight visual feedback to maintain posture in bilateral and unilateral (uninjured, injured) stances compared to healthy individuals remains unknown.

Purpose: The primary purpose of the study was to examine the sensory reweighting system changes to control posture in a simple double-limb stance and a more complex uninjured- or injured-limb stance under increased environmental constraints, manipulating somatosensory and visual information, for individuals with and without CAI. The secondary purpose of the study was to determine the effect of environmental and task constraints on postural stability.

Methods: The study included 42 physically active individuals with and without unilateral CAI. Participants completed postural control assessments using the Sensory Organization Test (SOT) on a NeuroCom dynamic posturography platform, which measures the ability to integrate somatosensory, visual, and vestibular feedback across six conditions of varying complexity. Equilibrium balance scores were calculated based on center-of-gravity sway, and sensory reweighting ratios were determined to assess the weighting of different sensory systems.

Results: The study is the first investigation of how the sensory reweighting system adapts to control posture under increased task constraints and how postural control is influenced by both environmental and task constraints in individuals with and without CAI. Notably, the CAI group did not reduce their reliance on vestibular feedback when standing on the injured limb. However, the inability to downweight vestibular feedback may represent a compensatory reliance for individuals with CAI, as they maintained postural stability on the injured limb better than healthy controls. Both groups showed different patterns of sensory feedback use depending on the task. Somatosensory input was the most emphasized during double-limb stance, whereas visual feedback was prioritized during single-limb stance in both injured and uninjured limbs. Differences in postural control between groups were shaped by task and environmental demands, although individuals with CAI demonstrated postural control similar to that of healthy participants.

Rolling the field forward: This research demonstrates that while individuals with CAI do not downweight vestibular feedback to maintain posture on their injured limb, this reliance may serve as a compensatory mechanism, allowing them to maintain better postural stability than those without CAI. In addition, postural control in both groups was influenced by the specific sensory systems engaged and the constraints imposed by the task. Clinicians should consider using a multisensory feedback approach in their interventions, challenging vestibular input, with and without visual cues, during tasks with increased demands to improve postural control for individuals with CAI.

Question for the researchers: How might clinicians implement multisensory feedback approaches in rehabilitation programs to specifically address the compensatory reliance on vestibular feedback observed in individuals with CAI?

Participant-Level Improvements in Health-Related Quality of Life in Those With Chronic Ankle Instability

Leave a comment

Blog Post Author Biography: Dr. Cameron Powden is an Associate Professor in the Department of Athletic Training at the University of Indianapolis. Dr. Powden’s interests include the investigation of clinically relevant interventions for ankle sprains and chronic ankle instability.

Citation: Powden CJ, Koldenhoven RM, Simon JE, et al. Participant-Level Analysis of the Effects of Interventions on Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients With Chronic Ankle Instability. Journal of Sport Rehabilitation. 2023;32(2):124-132. DOI: 10.1123/jsr.2022-0053

Take-to-the-clinic message: This investigation matches previous literature indicating that the available chronic ankle instability (CAI) interventions are capable of improving self-reported ankle function, global well-being, and injury-related fear at the group level for patients with CAI. This study uniquely assessed individual level responses of patients with CAI to multimodal interventions. Between 13.8% and 53.3% of patients demonstrated improvements, for individual patient-reported outcomes (PROs), that exceeded the minimal detectable change (MDC) of the measure. These findings signify that individually, we may hope to only have about half of our patients have meaningful improvements following intervention.

Background: CAI intervention studies have often focused on improving physical impairments of the ankle complex. Recently, increased emphasis has been placed on the sensory-perceptual impairments associated with CAI. This has resulted in CAI investigations examining the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) through PROs of those with CAI, and the influence of intervention on such PROs. While most studies have assessed self-reported ankle function and through the lens of group level response, there is a need to investigate the impact of interventions on other aspects of HRQoL (such as global well-being and injury-related fears) and the individual level response to treatment within those with CAI.

Purpose: To evaluate improvements in multiple domains of HRQoL, self-reported ankle function, global well-being, and injury-related fear, following multimodal interventions in patients with CAI by using group- and participant-level responder analyses.

Methods: A secondary analysis was completed on a compiled data set of original, participant-level data from seven previously published investigations. Each of the investigations investigated self-reported function in patients with CAI. A total of 136 physically active individuals with self-reported CAI were included in the analysis. These individuals underwent a wide range of multimodal interventions that ranged from 1 to 6 weeks in length, 1 to 12 supervised sessions, and may have included a home intervention component. PROs included were the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) ADL and Sport, Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia-11 (TSK-11), Fear Avoidance Belief Questionnaire (FABQ) and the Disablement in the modified Physically Active Scale (mDPA) physical summary component (PSC) and the mental summary component (MSC). The research team examined preintervention to postintervention changes in each PRO, as well as effect sizes (ES) and individual-level response rates through changes exceeding published MDCs.

Results: There was significant improvement in ankle-specific function following intervention that was associated with strong ESs and responder rates of 39.0% to 53.3%. There was a significant reduction in injury-related fear following intervention that was associated with moderate to strong effects and responder rates of 13.8% to 51.4%. Finally, there was a significant improvement in global well-being that was associated with strong effects and responder rates of 31.3%. 

Rolling the field forward: This investigation is part of the expanding evidence regarding interventions for those with CAI. It builds on previous multimodal intervention studies by combining various intervention protocols to allow for robust group and individual level analysis. The findings indicate that patients with CAI exhibit holistic HRQoL improvements following varied interventions. This investigation continues the exploration into individual-level responses within the CAI population. Further research is needed to better understand the clinical impact of this new form of analysis. Lastly, to enhance the ability to examine CAI interventions, at the group and individual level, there is a need to identify common clinician-, laboratory-, and patient-oriented outcome measures to allow for robust and comparative analysis.

Question for the researchers: What interventions would be beneficial for CAI patients to enhance aspects of HRQoL? How do researchers and clinicians work to develop common outcome measures to explore? Can the individual level responder analysis be used in clinical practice to examine patient progress?

Patient-Reported Outcomes at Return to Sport After Lateral Ankle Sprain Injuries

Leave a comment

Blog Post Author Biography:  Alexandra DeJong Lempke is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation at Virginia Commonwealth University, and has a clinical background as a certified athletic trainer. Dr. DeJong Lempke’s research focuses on biomechanical gait assessments of lower limb and ankle injuries through wearable technologies.

Citation: Kenneth C. Lam, Ashley N. Marshall, R. Curtis Bay, Erik A. Wikstrom; Patient-Reported Outcomes at Return to Sport After Lateral Ankle Sprain Injuries: A Report From the Athletic Training Practice-Based Research Network. J Athl Train. 2023; 58 (7-8): 627–634. doi: https://doi.org/10.4085/1062-6050-0111.22

Take-to-the-clinic message: Athletes across the United States self-reported residual pain, dysfunction, and disability at the time of return to sport after a lateral ankle sprain. Clinicians should implement patient-reported outcomes to catch lingering deficits post-ankle sprain to help guide return to sport decision-making.

Background: Lateral ankle sprains (LAS) are extremely common in sport and are often viewed as insignificant injuries with quick recoveries. Most patients return to sport within 10 days of injury, yet it is not clear if athletes may have lingering symptoms that may affect their long-term health. Understanding how patients with ankle sprains feel at the time of return to sport is important to catch residual problems post-injury and help with clinical decision-making.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate self-reports of improvement, pain, function, and disability at return to sport after an LAS injury using single-item patient-reported outcome measures.

Methods: This was a retrospective study of 637 patients with LAS who returned to sport within 60 days of injury. The researchers identified LAS cases from electronic medical records within the 2010-2021 Athletic Training Practice-Based Research Network database (AT-PBRN; 69 clinical practice sites with athletic trainers). The research team assessed pertinent patient details, such as school level, gender, and sport. They also assessed patient-reported outcome measures relevant to LAS at initial injury evaluation and at the time of return to sport:

  • Improvement – Global Rating of Change
  • Pain – Numeric Pain Rating Scale
  • Function – Global Rating of Function
  • Disability – Global Rating of Disability

Results: The LAS patients assessed in this study were about equal genders (53.2% males), were primarily secondary school aged (79.1% of the sample) and participated in field or court sports (78% played in either basketball, football, soccer, or volleyball). Most patients returned to sport within 8 days after LAS. About 2 in every 3 patients reported a meaningful improvement at return to sport, or feeling at least “quite a bit better” on the Global Rating of Change scale. Most patients also still felt they had lingering deficits at return to sport, particularly for lingering pain (~65%), reduced function (~86%), and residual disability (~36%).

Rolling the field forward: This research shows that although LAS patients improve after their injury, many patients still feel like they have not fully recovered when they return to their sport. Clinicians should incorporate objective measures like patient-reported outcomes into return-to-sport decisions to best understand deficits related to LAS and advocate for athlete well-being.

Question for the researchers: Do you think that incorporating patient-reported outcome measures specific to the ankle would have uncovered more lingering deficits at return to sport? How do you think external pressures, such as competition timepoints, may have influenced the findings? Would it be possible to determine if repeat injuries occurred among those with lingering deficits, signaling Chronic Ankle Instability?