AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
![]() This may be compensated by subtalar and midfoot pronation or valgus of the knee ( Piva et al., 2005), which are associated with chronic and acute injuries ( Mason-Mackay et al., 2017). Restricted ankle DF ROM limits the ability to pass the leg forward over the foot and to lower the center of mass during squat-type movements ( Piva et al., 2005). In addition, high inflation pressure and frequency did not provide additional benefits in increasing ankle DF ROM.Īnkle dorsiflexion (DF) range of motion (ROM) is associated with the risk of a wide variety of lower extremity injuries in athletes ( Mason-Mackay et al., 2017). This resulted from decreased pain sensitivity (i.e., increased PPT). In conclusion, IPC treatments, irrespective of applied pressure and mode of compression, increased ankle DF ROM. ΔMuscle hardness and Δheart rate variability did not differ significantly between trials. ΔPopliteal artery blood flow in BOOST80 and BOOST135 was significantly higher than that in SHAM and SQUEE80 at Post-0 ( p < 0.05). ΔWBLT performance, ΔPPT, and Δperceived relaxation in all IPC treatments were significantly higher than those in SHAM at Post-0 and Post-20 ( p < 0.05). The Weight-Bearing Lunge Test (WBLT), popliteal artery blood flow, pressure-to-pain threshold (PPT), muscle hardness, heart rate variability, and perceived relaxation were measured before (Pre) and immediately after IPC treatment (Post-0) and 20 min after IPC treatment (Post-20), and the changes in all variables from Pre (Δ) were calculated. Participants rested for 20 min after IPC treatment. For the experimental trials, the participants were initially at rest for 10 min and then assigned to either a 30-min SHAM, SQUEE80, BOOST80, or BOOST135. Fourteen, university intermittent team sport male athletes (age: 21 ± 1 year, height: 1.74 ± 0.05 m, body mass: 70.9 ± 7.7 kg, body fat percentage: 14.2 ± 3.6%, body mass index: 23.5 ± 2.5 kg/m 2 mean ± standard deviation) completed four experimental trials in a random order: 1) no compression with wearing IPC devices (SHAM), 2) the sequential compression at approximately 80 mmHg (SQUEE80), 3) the uniform compression at approximately 80 mmHg (BOOST80), and 4) the uniform compression at approximately 135 mmHg (BOOST135). ![]() This study aimed to investigate the effects of different IPC stimuli on the ankle DF ROM. 2Linear R&D Department SectionⅡ, Nitto Kohki Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japanĭespite substantial evidence of the effectiveness of intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) treatments for range of motion (ROM) improvement, little evidence is available regarding how different IPC stimuli affect ankle dorsiflexion (DF) ROM.1Graduate School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan.Takuma Yanaoka 1* Urara Numata 1 Kanna Nagano 1 Shiho Kurosaka 1 Hiroki Kawashima 2 ![]()
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |