الفهرس 
Whole body vibration versus biodex balance training on patients with chronic ankle instability
ABSTRACTOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 121 |  |  |
| | | from | 121 | | |
Abstract
Background: chronic ankle instability is one of common musculoskeletal injury which characterized by laxity, proprioceptive impairment, postural control defects, and functional performance deficits. Purpose: the study was designed to determine and compare between whole body vibration and biodex balance training on patients with chronic ankle instability. Method: Forty five patients (23 females and 22 male), with age ranged from 20 to 30 years old with unilateral chronic ankle instability randomly assigned into three equal groups, group ”A” (control group) consisted of 15 subjects (7 females and 8 males),their mean age are (27.53±5.07) years, weight (70.53 ± 10.62) kg., height (168.6 ± 8.5) cm and BMI (24.78 ± 2.87) kg/m2, they received stretching and strengthening exercises twice per week for six weeks , group ”B” consisted of 15 subjects (8 females and 7 males),their mean age are (25.66 ± 5.1) years, weight (68.73 ± 9.52) kg., height (170.53 ± 7.78) cm and BMI (23.63 ± 2.76( kg/m2, They received whole body vibration training (frequency 50 Hz, the amplitude was from 5 {u2013} 8 mm) plus stretching and strengthening exercises twice per week for six weeks and group ”C” consisted of 15 subjects (8 females and 7 males),their mean age are (25.46 ± 4.73) years, weight (71.93 ± 8.2) kg., height (168.53 ± 8.24) cm and BMI (25.37 ± 3.07) kg/m², they received biodex balance training (Maze control, limit of stability and Random control training modes) plus stretching and strengthening exercises twice per week for six weeks. The dynamic postural stability and postural sway control were assessed before and at the end of the treatment program using a biodex Balance System. Results: within group analysis revealed significant difference in dynamic postural stability and postural sway control in group B and C between before and after the treatment program (p value {u02C2} 0.05). The between-group analysis showed significant differences in all variables after treatment, with more significant differences observed in group C than in Groups A and B (p {u02C2} 0.05