The effect of long-term use of
ankle taping on balance
Stephanie McGregor
Dr. Mike Pavol
Exercise and Sports Science
Oregon State University
HHMI 2011
Background
• Ankle sprains are most common injury amongst
college athletes
• Many athletes continue to tape as preventative
measure
▫ Shown to reduce ankle sprains by up to 50%
How does taping help?
• Mechanical support
• Psychological benefits
• Enhanced proprioception
▫ Ability to sense a joint’s position
 Leads to improved balancing performance
• Direct effects on balance remain unclear
Components of Balance
Increased proprioception helps improve balance
Significance
• Review of literature shows little research
done studying the effects of long term use
of taping
▫ Determine if the effects of taping on ankle
proprioception and balance continue to be
significant over time
Use of new information
• Make more informed decisions about
the best treatment plan for athletes
suffering a sprained ankle
▫ Better evaluate the practicality of
regularly taping ankles
Question
• How does the long term use of
ankle taping effect balance?
Hypothesis
• Ankle taping will have a larger effect on the
balance of the participants who do not regularly
tape
▫ Body becomes acclimatized to the tape, such that
the benefits decrease with long-term use
• Effects of taping on balancing ability will vary
depending on the condition being tested
Methods
• 16 NCAA gymnasts are
being tested
▫ Balance plays a large
role in this sport
• Approximately half
‘tapers’ and the other
half ‘non-tapers’
Gymnast who regularly
tapes her ankle
Single leg balance test
• With hands on hips
▫ Three 30 second trials
performed for each of
the 4 conditions
Testing conditions
• Closed eyes removes visual cues
▫ Increases reliance on proprioception
• 2 inch thick block of foam between
the foot and force platform
Foam pad to make
balancing more difficult
Conditions
Eyes open
On ground
Eyes open
On foam
Tested with and
without tape
Eyes closed
On ground
Eyes closed
On foam
Force Plate
• Used to examine
balancing ability
▫ Forces used to calculate
the motion of the center
of pressure (COP)
Center of Pressure
• Average location of the force acting between
the foot and the ground
• Less movement of COP equates to better
balance
Center of Mass
• Less movement of COM equates to
better balance
Data Analysis
• Compare how far
and how fast
COP and COM
moved
▫ Side to side
(M/L)
▫ Forward to
backward (A/P)
Force plate
COP trajectory
Data Analysis
• Stabilogram diffusion coefficient
Collings & De Luca, Chaos 5 (1), 1995 p59
Standard deviation
(mm)
Greater COP A/P motion with taping
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Non-tapers
Tapers
No tape
Tape
No tape
Tape
Similar results for COM A/P motion
Greater COP A/P velocity with taping and in
non-tapers
Sway velocity (mm/s)
60
50
40
Non-tapers
30
Tapers
20
10
0
No tape
Tape
No tape
Tape
Greater short term slope with taping
Short tem slope (mm2/s)
1200
1000
800
Non-tapers
600
Tapers
400
200
0
No tape
Tape
No tape
Tape
Similar results for critical displacement with eyes closed
Short term slope
(mm2/s)
Greater short term slope in non-tapers than
tapers when eyes closed
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
Non-tapers
Tapers
Eyes open
Eyes Eyes open Eyes
closed
closed
Changes in COP M/L motion with taping
when eyes closed
Standard deviation
(mm)
12
no tape
10
tape
8
6
4
2
0
ground
foam
Eyes closed
ground
foam
Eyes closed
Discussion
• Contrary to hypothesis, tape negatively
affects balance, regardless of group
• Long-term tapers showed balancing
differences in the A/P direction and with
eyes closed
▫ Slower corrections to balance made
Discussion
• Further investigation needed
▫ For preliminary data only, not all
subjects have been tested yet
• Worthwhile to investigate alternatives to
ankle taping
Acknowledgements
Special thanks to:
• Dr. Mike Pavol
• Deb Graff
• Study participants
• Elizabeth Doran
• Sam Johnson
• Dr. Kevin Ahern
• Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI)
• Undergraduate Research and Innovation, Scholarship
and Creativity (URISC)