Skip to content

Comparison of the Effect of Virtual Reality training and conventional training in athletes with Functional Ankle Instability

Comparison of the Effects of Virtual reality and conventional training on functional ability and neurocognitive function in athletes with Functional Ankle Instability

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
IRCT
Registry ID
IRCT20090301001722N19
Enrollment
40
Registered
2018-05-07
Start date
2018-05-10
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2020-05-18

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Functional ankle instability. Sprain of ankle

Interventions

Intervention 1: In the experimental group, athletes have performed Wii Fit Plus games including balance training games (e.g. Soccer heading, Ski slalom, Tight rope walk, Table tilt), and strengthening
rest for 10 seconds
repeat this trend 10 times).

Sponsors

Tehran University of Medical Sciences
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
Male
Age
18 Years to 25 Years

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Male athletes are 19-25 years old They have at least one significant unilateral inversion sprain of either ankle followed by more than one repeated injury or the perception of the ankle “giving-way,” within the last year No evidence of mechanical instability; that assessed by the anterior drawer and talar tilt tests No history of ankle injury within the 3 months before participation No ankle surgery, no vestibular or respiratory disorder, no cognitive deficit (A score of 23 or less in Mini-Mental State Examination), no diabetes or recent lower-limb or low back pathology A Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool score lower than 24 Not participating in other rehabilitation exercise programs

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Report any pain Reluctant to continue the tests Use any medication with possible effects on neurocognitive function or functional ability

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Neurocognitive reaction time. Timepoint: Before the intervention, Immediately after the end of the intervention, A month after the end of the intervention. Method of measurement: Measurement tool: DLRT software, Measurement scale: milliseconds.;Number of errors in neurocognitive test. Timepoint: Before the intervention, Immediately after the end of the intervention, A month after the end of the intervention. Method of measurement: Measurement tool: DLRT software, Measurement scale: Number.;Reach distance in SEBT. Timepoint: Before the intervention, Immediately after the end of the intervention, A month after the end of the intervention. Method of measurement: Measurement tool: Meter, Measurement scale: Meter.;Jump distance in single hop test. Timepoint: Before the intervention, Immediately after the end of the intervention, A month after the end of the intervention. Method of measurement: Measurement tool: Meter, Measurement scale: Meter.;The elapsed time to perform the 8-hop and side hop tests. Timepoint: Before the intervention, Immediately after the end of the intervention, A month after the end of the intervention. Method of measurement: Measurement tool: Stopwatch, Measurement scale: milliseconds.;Subjective-sense of instability. Timepoint: Before the intervention, Immediately after the end of the intervention, A month after the end of the intervention. Method of measurement: Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool score (CAIT).

Countries

Iran (Islamic Republic of)

Contacts

Public ContactNiloofar Mohammadi

School of Rehabilitation, Tehran University of Medical Sciences

rafoolin2007@gmail.com+98 26 3351 9765

Outcome results

None listed

Source: IRCT (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026