Translate this page into:
The effect of core stabilization exercises on balance and functional performance in individuals with functional ankle instability: An open-label randomized controlled trial
*Corresponding author: Prachita P. Walankar, Department of Physiotherapy, MGM College of Physiotherapy, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India. prachita30@gmail.com
-
Received: ,
Accepted: ,
How to cite this article: Panhale VP, Walankar PP, Chheda DV. The effect of core stabilization exercises on balance and functional performance in individuals with functional ankle instability: An open-label randomized controlled trial. J Musculoskelet Surg Res. 2024;8:382-8. doi: 10.25259/JMSR_87_2024
Abstract
Objectives:
The objective of the study was to evaluate the effect of core stabilization exercises on balance and functional performance in functional ankle instability (FAI).
Methods:
An open-label randomized control pilot study was conducted with 30 FAI participants allocated to two groups. Inclusion criteria were the presence of frequent ankle sprains, sense of give-away of the ankle, and identification of FAI score >11. The experimental group (n = 15) received core stabilization exercises along with conventional exercises, whereas the control group (n = 15) received only conventional exercises. The intervention period was six weeks. The outcome measures for static balance, dynamic balance, and functional performance were the single-leg stance test, modified star excursion balance test (mSEBT), and side hop test, respectively. The assessment was done at baseline and six weeks post-intervention.
Results:
Within-group analysis showed improvement in the single-leg stance test and all direction reach distances of mSEBT in both groups using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Meanwhile, the side hop test revealed no difference between the two groups. A significant improvement was seen in mSEBT and single-leg stance scores (P ≤ 0.05) between the groups using the Mann–Whitney U-test. However, the side hop test showed no significant difference (P > 0.05).
Conclusion:
The present study concludes that core stabilization exercises improved balance compared to mobility and strengthening exercises. Hence, it is highly recommended that core stability training be implemented as a holistic approach to managing FAI.
Keywords
Balance
Core stability
Functional ankle instability
Physical function
Performance
INTRODUCTION
Ankle sprains are a commonly reported musculoskeletal disorder.[1] It has been observed that lateral ankle sprain recurs more frequently, leading to chronic ankle instability (CAI).[2] The common features seen in CAI include frequent sprains, a sense of giveaway, pain, reduced range of motion (ROM), muscle weakness, sensorimotor control deficits, and low self-reported function.[3,4] Based on causal factors, there are two types of CAI – mechanical instability (due to damage to the ankle ligamentous structure) and functional ankle instability (FAI) (due to neuromuscular and proprioceptive deficits).[5,6]
Repetitive ankle sprains commonly lead to FAI, with a reported prevalence rate of 32–47%.[3] The common clinical features are impaired proprioception, delayed reflexes, muscle weakness, reduced postural stability, and impaired balance.[7,8] It has been reported that FAI contributes to altered day-to-day function and quality of life with increased fear of falls.[9,10]
Varied rehabilitation strategies focus on mobility, muscle strength, balance, and proprioception in FAI.[11,12] Balance training and conventional exercises also improve postural control in patients with ankle instability.[13] The biomechanics of the ankle complex and its injuries are linked to proximal control and core stability.[14]
The lumbar spine, pelvis, and hip musculature form the core. This assists the function of the kinetic chain throughout the body.[15] Core ensures maintenance of the spine’s stability within the neutral during the performance of movements. It creates a stable proximal control to ensure proper muscle recruitment and motor control during the distal upper and lower limb movements.[16] Dastmanesh et al. reported improved postural control after eight weeks of core stability training in patients with CAI.[17] Alizamani et al. showed that 8 weeks of core stabilization training improved ankle muscle strength, dorsiflexion range, and proprioception in athletes with CAI.[18] This study aimed to investigate the effect of core stabilization exercises on balance and functional performance in FAI.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Study design
It was an open-label, randomized, and controlled pilot study that lasted from November 2020 to May 2021.
Study population
The study population was patients with FAI.
Sampling
A simple random sampling method was used.
Sample size
OpenEpi Software, Version 3, was used to calculate the sample size. Considering power as 80 with a confidence interval of 95%, the sample size accounted for 30 participants [Table 1].
Power | 80 |
Confidence interval | 95% |
Sample size | 30 |
Participants
Inclusion criteria
The study included patients having frequent ankle sprains, a sense of give-away of the ankle, and an identification of FAI score of >11.[19]
Exclusion criteria
Subjects having an injury to the lower extremity or spine in the past six months, degenerative conditions, congenital deformities of the lower extremity or spine, surgical history in the previous six months, history of cardiovascular or neurological conditions, and pregnant females were excluded from the study.
Outcomes variables
A single-leg stance test was used to measure static balance. The participant was instructed to stand on one leg while maintaining balance on the other leg. First, with eyes open and then with eyes closed. The time in seconds was recorded. The test was terminated when the participant’s foot touched the ground. Usually, normal individuals maintain a single-leg stance for approximately 30–45 s. The number of seconds an individual can maintain in this position, which was recorded. Three trials were conducted, and the average was recorded.[20]
Dynamic balance was measured using the modified star excursion balance test (mSEBT). Three reach distances – Anterior, posteromedial,and posterolateral were recorded. One practice trial for familiarization with the test was given (this practice trial was not included in the test). After a rest pause of 1 min, three trials were conducted. The normalized scores were calculated for each direction. The mean of the normalized distance of three trials in each direction was considered.[21]
Functional performance was measured using a side hop test. Participants were asked to hop in the lateral direction for about 30 cm, side to side, and return to the original position for ten repetitions as quickly as possible. The total time required to perform this test was recorded.[22]
Intervention
Both groups received treatment for six weeks, comprising three supervised weekly sessions, each lasting 40 min. The experimental group received core stabilization exercises along with conventional exercises, whereas the control group received only conventional exercises. A qualified physiotherapist administered the intervention.
The conventional exercises included stretching the gastrocnemius and soleus muscle (30 s) of three repetitions, three sets of ROM exercises of ankle dorsiflexion, plantar flexion, inversion, and eversion (three repetitions in each set), three sets of strengthening exercises of ankle musculature, using TheraBand resistance and bipedal calf raise (ten repetitions in each set), and neuromuscular control exercises. The progression of strengthening exercises was based on increasing the resistance and repetitions. Neuromuscular control exercises comprised balance and proprioceptive training. First, standing on one leg with eyes open, later progressed to eyes closed with 60 s hold for two repetitions was given. Two sets (five repetitions in each set) of step-up and step-down exercises were conducted in all four directions, along with balance board exercises and double-leg and single-leg stances. The total duration of treatment was 40 min.[23]
The experimental group received core stabilization exercises in addition to conventional exercises. The first phase (1–2 weeks) consists of core stabilization exercises, including abdominal drawing-in maneuvers leading to activation of transverses abdominis (TrA) and lumbar multifidus (LM) muscle. Participants were asked to palpate and feel the muscles’ contraction to provide feedback. In the second phase (3–4 weeks), coordinated cocontraction of both TrA and LM muscles was integrated, accompanied by upper and lower limb movements performed in different functional positions such as supine lying, sitting, standing, and quadruped. In the third phase (5–6 weeks), integration of core activation during the functional dynamic activities such as sit-to-stand, wall squats, lunges, step up, and step down was incorporated. Proper breathing control and maintenance of the neutral spine during all exercises were emphasized. Three sets of ten repetitions with the maintenance of the final position for 10 s were incorporated into all exercises. The total duration of treatment was 40 min.[24]
Study procedure
After receiving approval from the Ethical Committee, the study was conducted on 30 patients with FAI. The purpose of the study was explained in detail to the participants.
A total of 158 participants were assessed for eligibility, of which 111 were excluded based on the selection criteria, 17 denied participation in the study, and 30 were recruited [Figure 1]. Randomization was done using computer-generated software. Allocation of participants into experimental and control groups was done using sequentially numbered opaque sealed envelopes with a ratio of 1:1. The experimental group (n = 15) received core stabilization exercises along with conventional exercises. In contrast, the control group (n = 15) received only conventional exercises. The intervention period was six weeks, three sessions per week. Pre- and post-assessment were performed before and after the intervention.
Statistical analysis
The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 24: IBM Corp was used to analyze the data. The normality of the data was evaluated using the Shapiro–Wilk test. Since the data was not normally distributed, non-parametric tests were used for data analysis. Demographic data was represented using descriptive analysis. Comparison within the group was done using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. The scores were compared between the groups using the Mann–Whitney U-test. Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05.
RESULTS
Most participants were female (n = 26, 86.7%), compared to males (n = 4, 13.3%). The median and interquartile range values of demographic characteristics such as age, height, weight, and body mass index are shown in Table 2.
Variables | Experimental group (n=15) | Control group (n=15) |
---|---|---|
Median (IQR) | Median (IQR) | |
Age (years) | 23 (22–25) | 22 (21–24) |
Height (cm) | 161 (158–164) | 158 (156–160) |
Weight (kg) | 63 (56–77) | 58 (47–60) |
Body mass index (kg/m2) | 24.7 (21.2–29) | 22.8 (18.8–24.3) |
Sex (n[%]) | ||
Male | 2 (13.3) | 2 (13.3) |
Female | 13 (86.7) | 13 (86.7) |
Within-group analysis showed an improvement in the experimental and control groups for the single-leg stance test and all direction reach distances of mSEBT. However, no improvement was seen in the pre- and post-scores of the side hop test [Tables 3 and 4].
Variable | Experimental group | ||
---|---|---|---|
Pre-median (IQR) | Post-median (IQR) | P-value | |
Single-leg stance test (sec) | |||
Eyes Open (Rt) | 33.00 (22.58–60.00) | 57.72 (49.33–60.00) | 0.003* |
Eyes Open (Lt) | 32.60 (24.65–57.67) | 57.73 (49.40–60.00) | 0.001* |
Eyes Closed (Rt) | 7.91 (5.87–16.54) | 22.53 (16.15–40.47) | 0.001* |
Eyes Closed (Lt) | 8.16 (6.36–12.84) | 20.98 (16.11–40.19) | 0.001* |
mSEBT (cm) | |||
Ant (Rt) | 94.99 (87.27–97.25) | 106.58 (99.77–108.82) | 0.001* |
Ant (Lt) | 95.04 (86.52–99.41) | 104.68 (98.35–110.02) | 0.001* |
PM (Rt) | 83.37 (74.13–93.54) | 90.47 (84.93–101.24) | 0.003* |
PM (Lt) | 84.91 (71.36-89.29) | 89.11 (79.09–104.11) | 0.006* |
PL (Rt) | 68.57 (60.30–78.43) | 80.60 (73.60–85.96) | 0.003* |
PL (Lt) | 65.12 (58.04–77.72) | 73.57 (67.60–82.54) | 0.002* |
Side hop test (sec) | |||
Rt | 21.08 (0.00–28.02) | 22.55 (18.41–30.48) | 0.638 |
Lt | 27.99 (0.00–38.20) | 24.35 (18.90–29.35) | 0.975 |
Variable | Control group | ||
---|---|---|---|
Pre-median (IQR) | Post-median (IQR) | P-value | |
Single-leg stance test (sec) | |||
Eyes Open (Rt) | 53.49 (43.15–60.00) | 60.00 (47.56–60.00) | 0.022* |
Eyes Open (Lt) | 42.51 (27.41–58.67) | 57.24 (42.72–60.00) | 0.005* |
Eyes Closed (Rt) | 17.45 (10.33–21.27) | 25.71 (16.18–34.14) | 0.011* |
Eyes Closed (Lt) | 15.33 (8.67–22.87) | 26.23 (17.37–33.65) | 0.001* |
mSEBT (cm) | |||
Ant (Rt) | 96.74 (89.68–112.26) | 97.80 (95.22–111.60) | 0.017* |
Ant (Lt) | 96.63 (90.40–111.00) | 101.69 (93.60–115.38) | 0.003* |
PM (Rt) | 95.77 (81.78–102.39) | 97.06 (88.88–109.98) | 0.017* |
PM (Lt) | 90.94 (79.10–101.08) | 100.65 (88.96–108.88) | 0.001* |
PL (Rt) | 70.14 (66.63–83.73) | 68.03 (63.43–87.87) | 0.047* |
PL (Lt) | 77.67 (67.46–92.68) | 83.24 (75.96–93.37) | 0.012* |
Side hop test (sec) | |||
Rt | 24.78 (16.90–30.01) | 22.91 (17.50–36.02) | 0.910 |
Lt | 17.47 (0.00–31.08) | 21.40 (16.98–50.05) | 0.300 |
Between-group analysis revealed significant improvement in mSEBT and single-leg stance scores in the experimental group compared to the control group. However, no significant difference was seen in side hop test scores [Table 5].
Variable | Experimental group | Control group | P-value |
---|---|---|---|
Single-leg stance test (sec) | |||
Eyes Open (Rt) | 57.72 (49.33–60.00) | 60.00 (47.56–60.00) | 0.04* |
Eyes Open (Lt) | 57.73 (49.40–60.00) | 57.24 (42.72–60.00) | 0.35 |
Eyes Closed (Rt) | 22.53 (16.15–40.47) | 25.71 (16.18–34.14) | 0.04* |
Eyes Closed (Lt) | 20.98 (16.11–40.19) | 26.23 (17.37–33.65) | 0.34 |
mSEBT (cm) | |||
Ant (Rt) | 106.58 (99.77–108.82) | 97.80 (95.22-111.60) | 0.03* |
Ant (Lt) | 104.68 (98.35–110.02) | 101.69 (93.60–115.38) | 0.22 |
PM (Rt) | 90.47 (84.93–101.24) | 97.06 (88.88–109.98) | 0.000* |
PM (Lt) | 89.11 (79.09–104.11) | 100.65 (88.96–108.88) | 0.71 |
PL (Rt) | 80.60 (73.60–85.96) | 68.03 (63.43–87.87) | 0.02* |
PL (Lt) | 73.57 (67.60–82.54) | 83.24 (75.96–93.37) | 0.14 |
Side hop test (sec) | |||
Rt | 22.55 (18.41–30.48) | 22.91 (17.50–36.02) | 0.87 |
Lt | 24.35 (18.90–29.35) | 21.40 (16.98–50.05) | 0.14 |
DISCUSSION
The present study revealed that core stabilization exercises improved static and dynamic balance compared to mobility and strengthening exercises. However, there was no effect on the functional performance test or sidehop.
Core muscles act as a corset to provide stability while performing motion. It builds up inertia in response to any perturbation given to the body. It comprises abdominal muscles in front, vertebrae and gluteal muscles behind, diaphragm at the roof, and pelvic floor muscles from the floor. Intra-abdominal pressure increases on activation of the transverse abdominis muscle, which leads to an increase in the intra-abdominal pressure, which, further, causes tightening of the thoracolumbar fascia.[15]
These contractions occur before initiating limb movement, allowing a stable base for lower limb movement.[15] The rectus abdominis and oblique muscles provide postural stability as they are activated in a direction-specific pattern concerning limb movement. A precise cocontraction of the transversus abdominis and multifidus leads to an increase in muscle stiffness due to the feedforward nature of activation, thus utilizing primary muscles more efficiently and providing segmental stabilization.[25]
The activation of core musculature is necessary to generate rotational torques, which assist in the production of motion in the extremities.[15] During the performance of mSEBT, an individual needs to maintain balance on the stance leg and reach using the opposite leg in a specified direction. This leads to the firing of rectus abdominis and oblique muscles before limb movement. This helps to maintain balance. Furthermore, the multifidi and transverse abdominis muscles would help maintain dynamic balance during lower extremity movement by supporting the lumbar spine.[26]
Kahle and Gribble reported that a six-week core stability program led to an improvement in dynamic balance. This study hypothesized that recruitment of the abdominal muscles provides a stable base of support for postural stability.[27] Dastmanesh et al. reported improved postural control after eight weeks of core stability exercise training in patients with CAI. Core stability promoted an increase in the feedforward mechanism and improved neuromuscular control of the lower extremities.[17] This agrees with the findings of our study.
The present study showed no effect of core stabilization on the functional performance – side hop test. Naderi et al. divided 36 athletes with FAI into three groups – core stability training group, neuromuscular training group, and control group.
Exercises were administered for six weeks in core stability training and neuromuscular training groups. The control group did not receive any treatment. There was an improvement in dynamic balance and physical function in athletes with FAI in the core stability training and neuromuscular training group compared to the control group. However, the core stability training and neuromuscular training groups were equally effective.[28] Apart from core stability, a major requirement for the hop test was cardiorespiratory endurance, which was not very well trained and, hence, compromised in our study population. Furthermore, our study included the general population, which was not involved in any sports or high level of training and exercise, which could be the reason for the lack of significant improvements in the hop tests.[29]
There are a few limitations in the study. The sample size was small, and the duration of the intervention was six weeks, which is relatively short, the inclusion of the general population who were not involved in sports, and the majority of participants were females.
CONCLUSION
The present study concludes that core stabilization exercises have an additional effect in improving static and dynamic balance compared to conventional exercises in individuals with FAI.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Studies with long-term effects of core stability training with larger cohorts that will help generalize the results can be conducted in the future. Incorporating a core stability program provides a comprehensive and holistic approach toward rehabilitation in individuals with FAI. Hence, it is highly recommended that core stability training be implemented to manage FAI.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We would like to acknowledge all the participants who willingly participated in the study.
AUTHORS’ CONTRIBUTIONS
VPP and PPW were involved in the conception, design, data analysis, and manuscript editing. DVC was involved in the data collection. PPW and DVC were involved in compilating the first draft. All authors have critically reviewed and approved the final draft and are responsible for the manuscript’s content and similarity index.
ETHICAL APPROVAL
Ethical approval has been obtained from the Institutional Research Review Committee MGM/DCH/IEC//14/2020 dated March 16, 2020.
DECLARATION OF PARTICIPANT CONSENT
The authors certify that they have obtained all appropriate participant consent forms. In the form, the participants have given their consent for their images and other clinical information to be reported in the journal. The participants understand that their names and initials will not be published, and due efforts will be made to conceal their identity, but anonymity cannot be guaranteed.
USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI)-ASSISTED TECHNOLOGY FOR MANUSCRIPT PREPARATION
The authors confirm that there was no use of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technology for assisting in the writing or editing of the manuscript and no images were manipulated using AI.
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
There are no conflicting relationships or activities.
FINANCIAL SUPPORT AND SPONSORSHIP
This study did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
References
- The incidence and prevalence of ankle sprain injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective epidemiological studies. Sports Med. 2014;44:123-40.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2016 Consensus statement of the International Ankle Consortium: Prevalence, impact and long-term consequences of lateral ankle sprains. Br J Sports Med. 2016;50:1493-5.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- An updated model of chronic ankle instability. J Athl Train. 2019;54:572-88.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Selection criteria for patients with chronic ankle instability in controlled research: A position statement of the International Ankle Consortium. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2013;43:585-91.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Difference in postural control between patients with functional and mechanical ankle instability. Foot Ankle Int. 2014;35:1068-74.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Possible factors related to functional ankle instability. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2008;38:150-7.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Evidence of sensorimotor deficits in functional ankle instability: A systematic review with meta-analysis. J Sci Med Sport. 2010;13:2-12.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Impact of kinesiophobia on physical function and quality of life in functional ankle instability individuals: An observational study. Bull Fac Phys Ther. 2021;26:26.
- [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Assessment of balance and fear of falling in individuals with acute ankle sprain: A cross-sectional pilot study. J Musculoskelet Surg Res. 2024;8:147-52.
- [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Sensory-targeted ankle rehabilitation strategies for chronic ankle instability. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2016;48:776-84.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Balance-and strength-training protocols to improve chronic ankle instability deficits, part I: Assessing clinical outcome measures. J Athl Train. 2018;53:568-77.
- [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- The effectiveness of active exercise as an intervention for functional ankle instability: A systematic review. Sports Med. 2008;38:553-63.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Core stability and its relationship to lower extremity function and injury. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2005;13:316-25.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- The role of core stability in athletic function. Sports Med. 2006;36:189-98.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Core stability, part 1: Overview of the concept. Int J Athl Ther Train. 2012;17:8-13.
- [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- The effects of core stabilization training on postural control of subjects with chronic ankle instability. Ann Biol Res. 2012;3:3926-30.
- [Google Scholar]
- Effects of eight week core stability training on stable-and unstable-surface on ankle muscular strength, proprioception, and dorsiflexion in athletes with chronic ankle instability. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2023;34:6-12.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Development of the identification of functional ankle instability (IdFAI) Foot Ankle Int. 2012;33:755-63.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- The relevance of clinical balance assessment tools to differentiate balance deficits. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2010;46:239-48.
- [Google Scholar]
- Considerations for normalizing measures of the Star Excursion Balance Test. Measurement Phys Educ Exerc Sci. 2003;7:89-100.
- [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- The ability of 4 single-limb hopping tests to detect functional performance deficits in individuals with functional ankle instability. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2009;39:799-806.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- The effect of a 4-week comprehensive rehabilitation program on postural control and lower extremity function in individuals with chronic ankle instability. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2007;37:303-11.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Effects of core stabilization exercise and strengthening exercise on proprioception, balance, muscle thickness and pain related outcomes in patients with subacute nonspecific low back pain: A randomized controlled trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2021;22:998.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Contraction of the abdominal muscles associated with movement of the lower limb. Phys Ther. 1997;77:132-44.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Differences in feedforward trunk muscle activity in subgroups of patients with mechanical low back pain. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009;90:1159-69.
- [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Core stability training in dynamic balance testing among young, healthy adults. Athl Train Sports Health Care. 2009;1:65-73.
- [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
- Comparison between the effects of core stability exercises and neuromuscular exercises on dynamic balance and lower limb function of athletes with functional ankle instability. SJKU. 2016;21:61-72.
- [Google Scholar]
- The effect of trunk core stability training and total-body resistance exercise (TRX) on the performance, balance, and strength of athletes with ankle sprain: A clinical randomized trial study. J Res Rehabil Sci. 2018;14:239-47.
- [Google Scholar]