Proprioception is essential for neuromuscular control in relation to sport injury and performance. The effect of landing heights and loads on ankle inversion proprioceptive performance in individuals with or without chronic ankle instability (CAI) may be important but are still unclear. Forty-three participants (21 CAI and 22 non-CAI) volunteered for this study. The Ankle Inversion Discrimination Apparatus for Landing (AIDAL), with one foot landing on a horizontal surface and the test foot landing on an angled surface (10°, 12°, 14°, 16°), was utilized to assess ankle proprioception during landing. All participants performed the task from a landing height of 10 cm and 20 cm with 100% and 110% body weight loading. The four testing conditions were randomized. A repeated measures ANOVA was used for data analysis. The result showed that individuals with CAI performed significantly worse across the four testing conditions (p = 0.018). In addition, an increased landing height (p = 0.010), not loading (p > 0.05), significantly impaired ankle inversion discrimination sensitivity. In conclusion, compared to non-CAI, individuals with CAI showed significantly worse ankle inversion proprioceptive performance during landing. An increased landing height, not loading, resulted in decreased ankle proprioceptive sensitivity. These findings suggest that landing from a higher platform may increase the uncertainty of judging ankle positions in space, which may increase the risk of ankle injury.

Purpose: 1) to explore the test-retest reliability of a new device for measuring ankle inversion proprioception during walking, i.e., the Ankle Inversion Discrimination Apparatus—Walking (AIDAW) in individuals with or without Chronic Ankle instability (CAI); 2) to assess its discriminant validity in differentiating individuals with or without CAI; 3) to investigate its convergent validity by examining its association with Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool (CAIT) and the Y Balance Test (YBT).Methods: For test-retest reliability, 15 participants with CAI and 15 non-CAI healthy controls were recruited. Participants completed the AIDAW test twice with a 7-day interval. The area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) was obtained as the AIDAW score. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and MDC90 were calculated. For the validity study, another 20 individuals with CAI and 20 non-CAI healthy controls were involved. The AIDAW scores were analyzed by an independent samples t-test, and the optimal cutoff value of AIDAW scores to best distinguish individuals with CAI was calculated by Youden’s index. Spearman or Pearson correlation analysis was used to analyze the correlation between AIDAW proprioceptive scores and the CAIT and final YBT scores.Results: For test-retest reliability, the ICC values for the CAI, non-CAI, and the whole group were 0.755, 0.757, and 0.761 respectively. The MDC90 of the CAI and non-CAI group was 0.04 and 0.05. Regarding discriminant validity, the AIDAW proprioceptive discrimination scores in the CAI group were significantly lower than those in the non-CAI group (p = 0.003); and the cutoff score for distinguishing CAI from the non-CAI participants was 0.759. For convergent validity, the AIDAW scores were significantly correlated with the functional balance YBT final scores (p = 0.001) and the CAIT scores (p = 0.009).Conclusion: The AIDAW is a reliable and valid device for evaluating ankle inversion proprioception during walking in individuals with and without CAI. AIDAW can be used as a clinical assessment tool to discriminate CAI from non-CAI individuals and to monitor effects of rehabilitation. The AIDAW proprioceptive discrimination scores were significantly and positively correlated with YBT and CAIT scores.

No abstract