Examining Ankle-Joint Laxity Using 2 Knee Positions and With Simulated Muscle Guarding

Several factors affect the reliability of the anterior drawer and talar tilt tests, including the individual clinician's experience and skill, ankle and knee positioning, and muscle guarding.

To compare gastrocnemius activity during the measurement of ankle-complex motion at different knee positions, and secondarily, to compare ankle-complex motion during a simulated trial of muscle guarding.

Cross-sectional study.

Research laboratory.

Thirty-three participants aged 20.2 ± 1.7 years were tested.

The ankle was loaded under 2 test conditions (relaxed, simulated muscle guarding) at 2 knee positions (0°, 90° of flexion) while gastrocnemius electromyography (EMG) activity was recorded.

Anterior displacement (mm), inversion-eversion motion (°), and peak EMG amplitude values of the gastrocnemius (μV).

Anterior displacement did not differ between the positions of 0° and 90° of knee flexion (P = .193). Inversion-eversion motion was greater at 0° of knee flexion compared with 90° (P < .001). Additionally, peak EMG amplitude of the gastrocnemius was not different between 0° and 90° of knee flexion during anterior displacement (P = .101). As expected, the simulated muscle-guarding trial reduced anterior displacement compared with the relaxed condition (0° of knee flexion, P = .008; 90° of knee flexion, P = .016) and reduced inversion-eversion motion (0° of knee flexion, P = .03; 90° of knee flexion, P < .001).

In a relaxed state, the gastrocnemius muscle did not appear to affect anterior ankle laxity at the 2 most common knee positions for anterior drawer testing; however, talar tilt testing may be best performed with the knee in 0° of knee flexion. Finally, our outcomes from the simulated muscle-guarding condition suggest that clinicians should use caution and be aware of reduced perceived laxity when performing these clinical examination techniques immediately postinjury.