Effects of Whole-Body Vibration Exercise on Athletes with Ankle Instability: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Objective: Chronic Ankle Instability (CAI) or Functional Ankle Instability (FAI) is a condition characterized by laxity and mechanical instability in the ankle joint. This instability interferes with the activities and physical-functional parameters of athletes, which leads to repetitive ankle sprains. The current systematic review was carried out to identify the effects of whole-body vibration exercise (WBVE) in athletes with CAI.

Methods: We conducted electronic searches in Pubmed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Science Direct, Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Academic Search Premier (ASP) (EBSCO) databases on 26 February 2022. Registers were identified, and studies were selected for inclusion according to the eligibility criteria. The methodological quality was assessed by the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale.

Results: Seven studies were included with a mean methodological quality score of 5.85, considered 'regular' quality on the PEDro scale. WBVE interventions in athletes with CAI showed that this exercise contributes to a better response on parameters of neuromuscular performance, muscle strength and consequently in balance and postural control, variables that are for the management of CAI.

Conclusion: WBVE interventions in sports modalities promote physiological responses that may lead to positive effects in several parameters. The protocols proposed in each modality can be carried out in practice and are considered effective additional exercise and training methods beyond traditional types of training for athletes. However, more studies are needed on athletes with this condition, with specific protocols, to highlight the possible physiological and physical-functional responses. Protocol study registration: PROSPERO (CRD42020204434).

Keywords: ankle rehabilitation; athletes; chronic ankle instability; mechanical vibration; vibrating platform.

Figure 1

PRISMA flow diagram of the study selection process.

Figure 2

Assessment of the methodological quality of the included studies using the PEDro scale. (2) Subjects were randomly allocated to groups; (3) allocation concealed; (4) the groups were similar at baseline regarding the prognostic indicators; (5) was blinding of all subjects; (6) was blinding of all therapists who administered the intervention; (7) was blinding of all assessors who measured at minimal one key outcome; (8) measures of at least one key outcome were obtained from more than 85%; of the subjects firstly allocated to groups; (9) all subjects for whom outcome measures were disposable received the treatment or control condition as allocated or, where this was not possible, data for at least one key outcome was analyzed by “intention to treat”; (10) the results of between-group statistical comparisons are reported for at minimal one key outcome; (11) the study give both point measures and measures of variability for at minimal one key outcome [10,23,24,26,36,40,51].

Figure 3

Assessment for risk of bias for the included studies [10,23,24,26,36,40,51].