Effects of Ankle Orthoses, Taping, and Insoles on Postural Stability of Individuals with Chronic Ankle Instability: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic ankle instability (CAI) is a prevalent condition characterized by recurring instances of the ankle giving way and persistent symptoms, including pain and diminished function. Foot and ankle external supports are commonly used in clinical practice and research for treating CAI. This systematic review aimed to assess the effects of foot and ankle external supports on the postural stability of individuals with CAI to guide clinical practice and inform future research. A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases from 1 January 2012 to 1 November 2022. Eighteen studies involving individuals with CAI were chosen in this systematic review. The quality of the included studies and risk of bias were assessed using Cochrane Collaboration's tool for randomized controlled trials, the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for case-control studies, and the DELPHl-list for crossover trial studies. The external supports included in this review were ankle orthoses (elastic, semi-rigid, and active orthoses), taping (kinesiotaping and fibular reposition taping), and insoles (textured and supportive insoles). The outcome measures included static and dynamic postural stability tests, such as the single-leg stance test, star excursion balance test, Y-balance test, single-leg landing test, lateral jump test, walking test, and running test. The results showed that elastic orthoses, Kinesiotaping, and textured insoles demonstrated potential benefits in improving postural stability in individuals with CAI. Elastic orthoses decreased ankle joint motion variability, kinesiotaping facilitated cutaneous receptors and proprioceptive feedback, while textured insoles increased tactile stimulation and foot position awareness. However, the effects of semi-rigid orthoses, fibular reposition taping, and arch support insoles were inconsistent across studies. Future research should explore the long-term effects of these external supports, analyze the effects of different characteristics and combinations of supports, and employ standardized outcome measures and testing protocols for assessing postural stability.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".