Immediate effects of elbow orthoses on elbow proprioception in asymptomatic individuals: A randomized sham-controlled single-blinded study

Sevik Kacmaz K., ÜNVER B.

Journal of Hand Therapy, 2024 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Basım Tarihi: 2024
  • Doi Numarası: 10.1016/j.jht.2023.12.010
  • Dergi Adı: Journal of Hand Therapy
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, Biotechnology Research Abstracts, CINAHL, MEDLINE
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: Asymptomatic, Brace, Elbow, External support approaches, Joint position sense, Proprioception, Splint
  • Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Background: Improving proprioception can reduce the risk of injuries, while its disruption may lead to injuries and recurrent or persistent symptoms. Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the immediate effects of elbow orthoses on elbow proprioception in asymptomatic individuals. Study Design: This was a randomized, controlled, single-blinded study with a sham application. Methods: Sixty participants were equally distributed into three orthosis groups (counterforce, sleeve, and sham). Proprioception was assessed using active joint position sense error (JPSE) at 70° and 110° of elbow flexion at three time points: baseline (BS), immediately after (IA) wearing the orthosis, and 30 minutes after (30MA) wearing the orthosis. Results: Between groups: No significant difference in JPSE was observed at 70° (p = 0.095); however, there was a significant difference at 110° (p = 0.005). Between time points: At 70°, JPSE did not exhibit a significant difference (p = 0.055), whereas a significant difference was observed at 110° (p = 0.020). Interaction of time points×groups: No significant interaction was observed either at 70° (p = 0.476) or at 110° (p = 0.346). At 70°, within the sleeve group, significant differences were identified between BS-30MA (p = 0.001) and IA-30MA (p = 0.009). At 110°, in the sleeve group, significant differences were observed between BS-30MA (p = 0.007) and IA-30MA (p = 0.007). In the counterforce group, significant differences were identified between BS-30MA time points (p = 0.001). At 70°, no difference was observed within the overall evaluation in the counterforce group (p > 0.05), whereas at 110°, a significant difference was noted (p = 0.026). At both 70° and 110°, no differences were identified within the overall evaluation in the sleeve and sham groups (p > 0.05). Conclusions: In asymptomatic individuals, sleeve orthosis improved elbow proprioception at 70°, whereas both counterforce and sleeve orthoses were effective at 110°.