ArticleInternational journal of exercise science2025
The Effect of Ankle Bracing on Athletic Performance Variables in Healthy Young Adult Athletes.
Article in International journal of exercise science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Ankle Bracing as a Public Health Game Changer: A Narrative Review on the Prevention of Ankle Injuries in Basketball Players.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Acute ankle sprains are common in sports and carry a significantly increased risk of recurrence after an initial injury. Bracing has been shown to reduce injury recurrence; however, athletes may decline this prophylactic measure due to fear of negative effect on athletic performance. Previous research examining the impact of bracing on performance has demonstrated conflicting results. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of bracing on choice reaction time and foot speed in healthy, young adults using computerized agility testing. Twenty-eight healthy athletes aged 18-25 years completed the study. Subjects performed testing for choice reaction time (CRT), foot speed-forward (FSF), and foot speed-backwards (FSB) using Quick Board technology. Testing was performed in 3 bracing conditions: non-braced (NB), braced dominant ankle (BD), and braced non-dominant ankle (BND). Separate repeated ANOVAs were used to compare the effect of bracing for each performance variable. No significant effect of bracing on CRT (p=0.95) or FSF (p=0.075) was observed; however, there was a significant effect on FSB (p=0.035). Post-hoc testing revealed foot speed in the backwards direction was significantly lower in the BND condition vs. the NB condition (p=0.029). While bracing does not significantly impact CRT or FSF, bracing the non-dominant ankle may limit performance in athletic tasks that require posterior movement. These results provide valuable insights for clinicians and athletes when weighing the benefits of prophylactic bracing against the potential negative impact on performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.