ABSTRACT Background and Aims Altered postural control has been observed in chronic ankle instability (CAI). Kinesiophobia (fear of re‐injury) has been identified as a factor influencing postural stability. Therefore, postural control was assessed during jump landing among CAI athletes with and without kinesiophobia, as well as healthy controls. Methods A total of 60 participants were recruited, including 40 individuals with CAI and 20 healthy controls. The CAI group was subdivided into two cohorts: 20 subjects with kinesiophobia (Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia score > 37) and 20 without kinesiophobia. All participants performed a single‐leg jump landing task on a force plate. The following postural stability metrics were calculated: time to stabilization (TTS), and the mean and standard deviation of center of pressure (COP) displacement and velocity in the anterior–posterior (AP), medial–lateral (ML), and total directions. Results CAI subjects with kinesiophobia exhibited longer TTSs in the AP ( p = 0.019), vertical, and total directions ( p < 0.001, p = 0.015, p = 0.002) than healthy subjects. Additionally, CAI subjects with kinesiophobia demonstrated a significant increase in the velocity of COP displacement in the AP and ML directions ( p < 0.001, p = 0.004). These individuals showed greater variability in the velocity of COP displacement in the AP direction and in COP displacement in the ML direction than healthy subjects ( p < 0.001). Also, CAI with kinesiophobia group presented less variability in the velocity of COP displacement in the ML direction than other groups ( p < 0.001, p = 0.026). CAI with kinesiophobia group needed more time and more velocity in the AP direction than without kinesiophobia group ( p = 0.003). Conclusion Individuals with a high fear of re‐injury may perceive the jump landing task as threatening, requiring more time to land and regain stability. This fear can restrict the variability of velocity in the ML direction, resulting in decreased control over the AP direction due to limitations on managing degrees of freedom.
Jafari et al. (Fri,) studied this question.