Skip to main content

Passive dorsiflexion stiffness is poorly correlated with passive dorsiflexion range of motion

Journal Article


Download full-text (Open Access)

Abstract


  • The purpose of this study was to determine the relationships among passive measures of weight-bearing dorsiflexionrange of motion, non-weight-bearing dorsiflexionrange of motion and dorsiflexionstiffness, thereby establishing whether they assess similar mechanical characteristics, as each measure has been implicated in injury risk during landings.

    Design

    Cross-sectional study.

    Methods

    Passive weight-bearing dorsiflexionrange of motion, non-weight-bearing dorsiflexionrange of motion and dorsiflexionstiffness were quantified for 42 males (22.8 ± 5.0 years). The relationship between each data set was calculated using Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients.

    Results

    Although weight-bearing dorsiflexionrange of motion and non-weight-bearing dorsiflexionrange of motion were significantly correlated, the strength of the relationship was poor (r2 = 0.18; p = 0.004). Weight-bearing dorsiflexionrange of motion (mean = 43.0 ± 5.0°) was significantly greater than non-weight-bearing dorsiflexionrange of motion (29.8 ± 5.9°; p < 0.001) and weight-bearing dorsiflexionrange of motion and non-weight-bearing dorsiflexionrange of motion were also poorlycorrelated with passivedorsiflexionstiffness (1.48 ± 0.55 Nm °−1; r2 = 0.04 and r2 = 0.14, respectively), despite the latter relationship being significant (p = 0.017).

    Conclusions

    Passivedorsiflexionstiffness was not strongly associated with dorsiflexionrange of motion, despite the significant correlation in the non-weight-bearing condition. It must be acknowledged that passivedorsiflexionstiffness was weakly associated with dorsiflexionrange of motion, although the strength of the association suggests that it may not necessarily determine dorsiflexionrange of motion. Furthermore, the functional dorsiflexion limits of the ankle during weight-bearing tasks may be underestimated or misrepresented by non-weight-bearing measures of dorsiflexionrange of motion. Therefore, although ankle dorsiflexionrange of motion and dorsiflexionstiffness have been implicated in injury risk during weight-bearing tasks such as landings, it may be due to different mechanisms.

Publication Date


  • 2013

Citation


  • Whitting, J. W., Steele, J. R., McGhee, D. E. & Munro, B. J. (2013). Passive dorsiflexion stiffness is poorly correlated with passive dorsiflexion range of motion. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 16 (2), 157-161.

Scopus Eid


  • 2-s2.0-84873522448

Ro Full-text Url


  • http://ro.uow.edu.au/context/aiimpapers/article/1605/type/native/viewcontent

Ro Metadata Url


  • http://ro.uow.edu.au/aiimpapers/604

Has Global Citation Frequency


Number Of Pages


  • 4

Start Page


  • 157

End Page


  • 161

Volume


  • 16

Issue


  • 2

Place Of Publication


  • Australia

Abstract


  • The purpose of this study was to determine the relationships among passive measures of weight-bearing dorsiflexionrange of motion, non-weight-bearing dorsiflexionrange of motion and dorsiflexionstiffness, thereby establishing whether they assess similar mechanical characteristics, as each measure has been implicated in injury risk during landings.

    Design

    Cross-sectional study.

    Methods

    Passive weight-bearing dorsiflexionrange of motion, non-weight-bearing dorsiflexionrange of motion and dorsiflexionstiffness were quantified for 42 males (22.8 ± 5.0 years). The relationship between each data set was calculated using Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients.

    Results

    Although weight-bearing dorsiflexionrange of motion and non-weight-bearing dorsiflexionrange of motion were significantly correlated, the strength of the relationship was poor (r2 = 0.18; p = 0.004). Weight-bearing dorsiflexionrange of motion (mean = 43.0 ± 5.0°) was significantly greater than non-weight-bearing dorsiflexionrange of motion (29.8 ± 5.9°; p < 0.001) and weight-bearing dorsiflexionrange of motion and non-weight-bearing dorsiflexionrange of motion were also poorlycorrelated with passivedorsiflexionstiffness (1.48 ± 0.55 Nm °−1; r2 = 0.04 and r2 = 0.14, respectively), despite the latter relationship being significant (p = 0.017).

    Conclusions

    Passivedorsiflexionstiffness was not strongly associated with dorsiflexionrange of motion, despite the significant correlation in the non-weight-bearing condition. It must be acknowledged that passivedorsiflexionstiffness was weakly associated with dorsiflexionrange of motion, although the strength of the association suggests that it may not necessarily determine dorsiflexionrange of motion. Furthermore, the functional dorsiflexion limits of the ankle during weight-bearing tasks may be underestimated or misrepresented by non-weight-bearing measures of dorsiflexionrange of motion. Therefore, although ankle dorsiflexionrange of motion and dorsiflexionstiffness have been implicated in injury risk during weight-bearing tasks such as landings, it may be due to different mechanisms.

Publication Date


  • 2013

Citation


  • Whitting, J. W., Steele, J. R., McGhee, D. E. & Munro, B. J. (2013). Passive dorsiflexion stiffness is poorly correlated with passive dorsiflexion range of motion. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 16 (2), 157-161.

Scopus Eid


  • 2-s2.0-84873522448

Ro Full-text Url


  • http://ro.uow.edu.au/context/aiimpapers/article/1605/type/native/viewcontent

Ro Metadata Url


  • http://ro.uow.edu.au/aiimpapers/604

Has Global Citation Frequency


Number Of Pages


  • 4

Start Page


  • 157

End Page


  • 161

Volume


  • 16

Issue


  • 2

Place Of Publication


  • Australia