Cargando…

Kinematic real-time feedback is more effective than traditional teaching method in learning ankle joint mobilisation: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: To analyse the effect of real-time kinematic feedback (KRTF) when learning two ankle joint mobilisation techniques comparing the results with the traditional teaching method. METHODS: Double-blind randomized trial. Settings: Faculty of Health Sciences. Participants: undergraduate student...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: González-Sánchez, Manuel, Ruiz-Muñoz, Maria, Ávila-Bolívar, Ana Belén, Cuesta-Vargas, Antonio I.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5054622/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27716215
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0789-8
_version_ 1782458636935626752
author González-Sánchez, Manuel
Ruiz-Muñoz, Maria
Ávila-Bolívar, Ana Belén
Cuesta-Vargas, Antonio I.
author_facet González-Sánchez, Manuel
Ruiz-Muñoz, Maria
Ávila-Bolívar, Ana Belén
Cuesta-Vargas, Antonio I.
author_sort González-Sánchez, Manuel
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To analyse the effect of real-time kinematic feedback (KRTF) when learning two ankle joint mobilisation techniques comparing the results with the traditional teaching method. METHODS: Double-blind randomized trial. Settings: Faculty of Health Sciences. Participants: undergraduate students with no experience in manual therapy. Each student practised intensely for 90 min (45 min for each mobilisation) according to the random methodology assigned (G1: traditional method group and G2: KRTF group). G1: an expert professor supervising the student’s practice, the professorstudent ratio was 1:8. G2: placed in front of a station where, while they performed the manoeuvre, they received a KRTF on a laptop. Outcome measures: total time of mobilisation, time to reach maximum amplitude, maximum angular displacement in the three axes, maximum and average velocity to reach the maximum angular displacement, average velocity during the mobilisation. RESULTS: Among the pre-post intervention measurements, there were significant differences within the two groups for all outcome variables, however, G2 (KRTF) achieved significantly greater improvements in kinematic parameters for the two mobilisations (significant increase in displacement, velocity and significant reduction in the mobilisations runtime) than G1. Ankle plantar flexion: G1′s measurement stability (post-intervention) ranged between 0.491 and 0.687, while G2′s measurement stability ranged between 0.899 and 0.984. Ankle dorsal flexion mobilisation: G1 the measurement stability (post-intervention) ranged from 0.543 and 0.684 while G2 ranged between 0.899 and 0.974. CONCLUSION: KRTF was proven to be more effective tool than traditional teaching method in the teaching - learning process of two joint mobilisation techniques. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02504710.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5054622
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50546222016-10-19 Kinematic real-time feedback is more effective than traditional teaching method in learning ankle joint mobilisation: a randomised controlled trial González-Sánchez, Manuel Ruiz-Muñoz, Maria Ávila-Bolívar, Ana Belén Cuesta-Vargas, Antonio I. BMC Med Educ Research Article BACKGROUND: To analyse the effect of real-time kinematic feedback (KRTF) when learning two ankle joint mobilisation techniques comparing the results with the traditional teaching method. METHODS: Double-blind randomized trial. Settings: Faculty of Health Sciences. Participants: undergraduate students with no experience in manual therapy. Each student practised intensely for 90 min (45 min for each mobilisation) according to the random methodology assigned (G1: traditional method group and G2: KRTF group). G1: an expert professor supervising the student’s practice, the professorstudent ratio was 1:8. G2: placed in front of a station where, while they performed the manoeuvre, they received a KRTF on a laptop. Outcome measures: total time of mobilisation, time to reach maximum amplitude, maximum angular displacement in the three axes, maximum and average velocity to reach the maximum angular displacement, average velocity during the mobilisation. RESULTS: Among the pre-post intervention measurements, there were significant differences within the two groups for all outcome variables, however, G2 (KRTF) achieved significantly greater improvements in kinematic parameters for the two mobilisations (significant increase in displacement, velocity and significant reduction in the mobilisations runtime) than G1. Ankle plantar flexion: G1′s measurement stability (post-intervention) ranged between 0.491 and 0.687, while G2′s measurement stability ranged between 0.899 and 0.984. Ankle dorsal flexion mobilisation: G1 the measurement stability (post-intervention) ranged from 0.543 and 0.684 while G2 ranged between 0.899 and 0.974. CONCLUSION: KRTF was proven to be more effective tool than traditional teaching method in the teaching - learning process of two joint mobilisation techniques. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02504710. BioMed Central 2016-10-06 /pmc/articles/PMC5054622/ /pubmed/27716215 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0789-8 Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
González-Sánchez, Manuel
Ruiz-Muñoz, Maria
Ávila-Bolívar, Ana Belén
Cuesta-Vargas, Antonio I.
Kinematic real-time feedback is more effective than traditional teaching method in learning ankle joint mobilisation: a randomised controlled trial
title Kinematic real-time feedback is more effective than traditional teaching method in learning ankle joint mobilisation: a randomised controlled trial
title_full Kinematic real-time feedback is more effective than traditional teaching method in learning ankle joint mobilisation: a randomised controlled trial
title_fullStr Kinematic real-time feedback is more effective than traditional teaching method in learning ankle joint mobilisation: a randomised controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Kinematic real-time feedback is more effective than traditional teaching method in learning ankle joint mobilisation: a randomised controlled trial
title_short Kinematic real-time feedback is more effective than traditional teaching method in learning ankle joint mobilisation: a randomised controlled trial
title_sort kinematic real-time feedback is more effective than traditional teaching method in learning ankle joint mobilisation: a randomised controlled trial
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5054622/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27716215
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0789-8
work_keys_str_mv AT gonzalezsanchezmanuel kinematicrealtimefeedbackismoreeffectivethantraditionalteachingmethodinlearninganklejointmobilisationarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT ruizmunozmaria kinematicrealtimefeedbackismoreeffectivethantraditionalteachingmethodinlearninganklejointmobilisationarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT avilabolivaranabelen kinematicrealtimefeedbackismoreeffectivethantraditionalteachingmethodinlearninganklejointmobilisationarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT cuestavargasantonioi kinematicrealtimefeedbackismoreeffectivethantraditionalteachingmethodinlearninganklejointmobilisationarandomisedcontrolledtrial