Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to compare the impact of the mobilization techniques and mobilization with movement techniques on static balance in individuals with acute inversion ankle sprain. METHODS: Volunteers with acute inversion ankle sprain (N = 40) were equally and randomly assigned to 2 groups. Participants in intervention group I received the Mulligan mobilization with movement techniques, whereas participants in intervention group II underwent the Maitland mobilization techniques. Each participant received the intervention every other day for 2 consecutive weeks. To assess static balance, participants assumed a single-leg stance on the affected leg at the center of a force plate with eyes open or closed plate for 20 seconds. The displacement, velocity, and area of the center of pressure were recorded 1 day before and after the intervention. RESULTS: The velocity of the center of pressure in the anterior-posterior direction was significantly reduced only in group I during eyes open (P = .043) and closed (P = .004). However, the displacement of the center of pressure in the anterior-posterior direction was significantly decreased in both group I (P = .024) and group II (P = .028) with eyes open. No significant changes were found in the area of the center of pressure in either group during eyes open or closed (P > .053). CONCLUSIONS: Both Mulligan's and Maitland's approaches significantly improved sway displacement. For the individuals with acute inversion ankle sprain who were included in this study, the Mulligan technique were more effective in improving static balance indicators compared to the Maitland technique. CLINICAL TRIAL: The study was then registered in the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (17/02/2019) (IRCT20190108042292N2).