Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'ankle'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Updates!
    • News
  • Peak Performance Blog
    • Blogs
  • Success Stories
    • Success Stories
  • Youth Sports Now Radio Show
    • Blogs
    • Podcasts
  • Workshops
    • Back Pain & Sciatica
    • Balance & Falls Prevention
  • Referring Physicians
    • Physician Newsletters
  • Videos
    • Understanding How Your Body Works 101
    • Peak PT Serving the Community
    • 3D FUNctional Workouts - Getting Creative!
    • Top 3 Tips & Secrets Videos
    • Paradigm VolleyBall Training with Peak Performance
    • Improving Your Golf Game!
    • Functional Flexibility
    • Fireside Chat with Mike from Peak Performance 2016
    • Videos
    • Welcome to Peak Performance!
  • Peak Performer of the Month

Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests


Certifications


Company


Position


Tagline

Found 40 results

  1. Peak Performance Physical Therapy & Sports Training EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE UPDATE March 2022 Optimizing Outcomes & Reducing Costs for Ankle Sprains: New Evidence on the Impact of Delayed Care by Karen Napierala MS, AT, PT, CAFS CURRENT EVIDENCE Rhon DI, Fraser JJ. et al.“Delayed Rehabilitation Is Associated With Recurrence and Higher Medical Care use After Ankle Sprain Injuries in the United States Military Health System. JOSPT, 51(12), 2021 2021;619-627. (We’d love to hear your professional insights on this topic. Let me know your thoughts after reading this summary at PT@PeakPTRochester.com or if you have a patient case you'd like to discuss) Clinical Scenario...What would you do? A 24 year old male comes into your office after a 2nd time ankle inversion MOI with local swelling and pain. Non weight bearing AROM inversion and plantarflexion are limited/painful and dorsiflexion is significantly limited. His gait is antalgic with considerable favoring. Plain radiographs are (-) for fracture. Anterior Drawer test is mild Grade iI laxity. The patient is eager to return to activity as soon as possible, including work on the 2nd floor office building with a mix of sitting/walking/stairs, resuming fitness running and singles tennis league, and has three children aged 3 months to 5 years . I would prescribe… RICE and gradual activity return as able - call if problems. Rest in boot x 1-2 weeks + RICE and then go back to activity gradually - call if problems. PT with Class IV laser, early motion/proprioception work and wb progression activity. FU 4 wks if needed. Crutches PWB until gait normalized, simple HEP exercise sheet of generic ankle exercises, return to activity as symptoms allow. FU in office 6 weeks. SUMMARY: A retrospective cohort study of US MIlitary Health System beneficiaries (active duty/retired, family, etc) seeking care for an ankle sprain between 2010-2012 using only data available with both 12mo look-back and 12mo follow up data, resulting in 24,502 cases. Cases were grouped into receiving rehabilitation and no rehabilitation. Using medical and financial billing records, the effects of timing of rehabilitation on injury recurrence and injury-related medical care costs and visits were measured up to one year after injury. Approximately 1 in 4 people received rehabilitation. The probability of a recurrent ankle sprain increased for each day that rehabilitation wasn’t provided during the first week and plateaued for the next 2 months, becoming 2x (OR = 1.97) greater for those receiving PT at 8-12 weeks vs those starting rehab within 4 weeks. The total cost were also greater (OR = 1.13) for those delaying rehab vs early rehab, up to $1400 per episode. Overall recurrence and costs were less for those not obtaining rehabilitation, however, likely contributing factors such as severity and activity goals were not studied, among others. Data did include stratification considering other military duty related and medical comorbidity effects on recurrence and costs. The conclusion was that the earlier the musculoskeletal rehabilitation care started directly after the ankle sprain occurs the lower the chance of recurrence, as well as the downstream ankle-related medical costs. Early care is also important based on the other studies showing over 33% of ankle sprains go on to become chronically unstable. We believe not only early care is necessary but high quality care that includes discerning biomechanical assessment and customized manual therapy/exercise. There are many potential contributing factors for ankle sprain recurrence that are also related to optimizing recovery from a current episode that are not necessarily part of traditional therapy approaches. Our anecdotal experience supports research showing progression to CAI in what seems to be a significant number of patients who themselves and/or their providers viewed an early ankle sprain in a “routine” or sometimes dismissive way. Many factors related to faster/better recovery and prevention of recurrence are controllable. Background: In the US military, 329,702 enlisted members and 30,554 family members received care for ankle sprains over a 9 year time frame from 2006-2015. Many studies show that after two weeks the pain has retracted. Studies have shown 5-33% of ankle sprains have some pain after one year and that 15-54 % didn't recover after 3 years. Recurrence may happen up to 8 years after the initial injury. Over 33% of these sprains have been shown to become chronic ankle Instabilities (CAI) cases. College students with CAI averaged 2100 less steps per day. Total financial burden (adjusted for inflation) of ankle sprains can range from $11.7M to $90.0M per year. Early treatment for other musculoskeletal disorders has been proven effective. The authors studied time to begin rehabilitation on ankle sprain recurrence or future use of medical care for that ankle. Methods: This retrospective cohort study includes all beneficiaries (all active and retired military members, their families and other affiliated beneficiaries) of the US military Health System seeking care for an ankle sprain over a two year period from 2010-2012(with 12mo look-back 2009 to look-forward 2012 range limits). The 39,340 total cases resulted in 24,502 individuals diagnosed with an ankle sprain injury having a full 12-month look-back and follow up. Groups were divided into those with and without rehabilitation following an ankle injury which they sought formal care. Rehabilitation was identified by cases with medical encounters that included medical billing codes for therapeutic exercise, therapeutic activities, manual therapy, and modalities. Not all rehabilitation was from a physical therapist. There was a sub group for direct military clinic care, or civilian network clinic setting since the costs would be different. Considerations were given for comorbidities including: cardiometabolic factors, chronic pain dx, insomnia, depression, anxiety, concussion/ traumatic brain injury and PTSD. Findings: There were 6150 individuals who sought care for ankle sprains and received rehabilitation and 16,325 who did not have rehabilitation (27.4% who sought care received rehab and 72.6% who sought care did not)! Delayed rehabilitation was linearly associated with increasing probability of recurrence (after adjusting for comorbidities.) The probability of recurrence in the rehab groups increased each day during the first week post injury that treatment was not sought. It then plateaued until the first month, then increased again the second/ third months. Individuals who received physical rehab between 8 and 12 weeks had 1.97 greater odds of recurrence compared to those who received immediate physical rehab within 4 weeks. Delayed rehabilitation was linearly associated with a greater number of ankle-related medical visits.Of all the comorbidities, a chronic pain related diagnosis amplified the amount of visits they were seen in a medical office (by at least 10 visits). This translated to $292 to $2268 per cse for ankle sprains with delayed rehabilitation. Individuals in the non rehab group were 32% less likely to resprain. They hypothesized that these people chose far less risky activities and were much less active following the first sprain. (especially when they had chronic pain, or PTSD). Author's Conclusion: There is a greater chance of ankle sprain recurrence, chronic ankle issues, and increased cost to the system and individuals when rehabilitation for the sprain is delayed. THE PEAK PERFORMANCE PERSPECTIVE: Ankle sprains are one of the most common musculoskeletal injuries that occur. These injuries are seen in primary care, orthopedic, and podiatric physician office regularly. Not only patients but also providers all run the risk of thinking, “It's only an ankle sprain - rest it and go back in a week” …but is that the best option now and in the long run for our patients? For perspective, there are a few key facts to be aware of. Ankle sprains were the primary reason for lost (military) duty days in 2017 - 2018. Recurrence may happen for up to 8 years after the initial injury. Chronic ankle instability occurs in up to 40% of individuals with that first time lateral ankle sprain. The financial burden to the military is 11.7M to 90.9M per year! Military ankle sprain numbers have been shown to be similar to the active civilian population in their response to this injury. This study shows that what we do with them not only affects the patient's lifestyle in the future, but both their own financial costs and the total cost on the insurance system. So how do we as physicians and therapists make our decisions on how to treat? I am seeing a 50 year old male now who has had low back and L knee pain for years. During the initial history he reported the L ankle was sprained repeatedly in high school - with only a “walk it off “ rehabilitation that was popular then. He never regained his normal ankle dorsiflexion, and was left with a host of issues including inability to squat appropriately on his L leg due to that lack of dorsiflexion. His compensation happened to be extreme pronation during squatting. This led to decreased balance, subsequent increases of tibial and femoral internal rotation during WB activity that produced a “dynamic valgus” collapsing of his knee,( resultant patello-femoral pain, and quad weakness) his hip(glut medius weakness and poor pelvic control), and eventually affected his back. If the ankle was treated appropriately initially, 30 years of knee and hip abnormal mechanics may have been prevented. There are internal and external contributors to the ankle sprains. You can get yourself faster, more nimble and able to avoid these, External factors such as a tree root , rocks, uneven surfaces, or another player's ankle all can cause excess motion and sometimes means, no matter how perfect your anatomy is or how well trained your balance and agility and strength may be, you're probably going to sprain that ankle. Internal factors (biomechanics) are really the key place that changes can be made to reduce risk and optimize recovery. Good therapy should include looking at the biomechanics and functional patterns of the entire lower extremity. What is the cause for the injury? Have they returned to full ROM without aberrant planes of motion compensating for the lack of normal motion? Is there poor mobility that can cause the ankle to more frequently “live” near that injury risk position? Here are some key things we’d screen for (outside the typical ankle ROM, strength, etc) : Lack of dorsiflexion in subtalar neutral (needed for late gait phase mechanics). Without proper ankle sagittal plane motion, the ankle will choose to compensate into other planes (such as transverse, or frontal in abnormal amounts) or in the sagittal plane via early heel rise, reducing the area of contact for inherent stability. The ability for the ankle to help dissipate forces with jumping, running, and and cutting relies on all three levels (hip, knee, and ankle) to adjust the speed of deceleration when gravity is accelerating you towards the ground. Foot alignment/structure. An uncompensated rearfoot varus(stiffly inverted NWB and WB) or a compensated forefoot valgus (supinated foot with higher arch - including inversion tendency) - both especially concerning since 94% were lateral or inversion sprains. Limited Calcaneal eversion. The subtalar joint’s ability to “load” into eversion/pronation upon hitting the ground in walking or other movements/athletics allows you adaptation to uneven surfaces. Frequently we see ankle sprain patients unable to evert in general, meaning they are living that much closer to inversion (ie risk). Hip retroversion and/or cocca valga will also set an individual up for the foot to be an inverted position and can predispose an individual to ankle sprains A pronated foot oddly enough may also predispose someone to ankle sprains. A prolonged everted position may negatively impact the proprioceptive awareness of excessive inversion and also be less reactive at the peroneals due to the delayed stretch reflex. We’ve seen numbers of these in the clinic where patients or providers first expected the patient to describe a deltoid or eversion MOI sprain but instead they did experience an uncontrolled inversion episode. Prior concussions or balance issues lead individuals to be less apt to adapt to quick changes of direction, or the surface you are moving on. Proprioception - generic and inversion control specific. Oftentimes balance testing identifies a more general lacking of neurologic sensorimotor mechanoreceptor system function such as with eyes closed or dominant eye closed with head up mini squats, but the ability also to specifically control for frontal and transverse plane loading into inversion/supination must be determined. Left untreated these sprains can bring on secondary issues. The example of the 50 year old with a 30 year old ankle sprain is far from out of the ordinary. Studies show that many ankle sprains “feel “ better in 2 weeks. Once they feel better there is a tendency and risk as a clinician and certainly as the patient to think that they “are” better. But we look at the “being better” as an objective, measurable thing rather than simply a feeling the patient has. We want them to have enough motion to be able to handle the unexpected, or live out their dreams, not just be able to walk on a flat surface for 20 minutes. College students left untreated with subsequent ankle issues were found to walk 2100 steps fewer than their intact ankle cohorts. It’s key that good therapy help take them from “feeling better” to “being better”. That requires simply starting with physical therapy early, as Rhon et al found. The next key is that quality care will include actually looking for the biomechanical issues that predispose them to “living in a box” of safety and limitation. Especially for athletes and for active lifestylers the goal must be instead be to help them be capable of performing “outside the box” of safety and of constrained motions and loading where risks are always kept low, so they can return confidently to the activities they love but do so with less risk of recurrence. The following case exemplifies the benefits of early rehab following an ankle sprain. THE PEAK PERFORMANCE EXPERIENCE: Terry said: “ I am playing volleyball on a high level with minimal to no issues. I can jump and land indoors. The stiffness I had in my ankles is gone!” History: Terry was a high school volleyball middle hitter. She had to jump high, and land hard. If the set and/or her approach was off then she’d have to tolerate landing off balance on one leg, risking inversion forces. She injured her ankle during volleyball when she landed on an opponent’s foot, causing a rapid inversion - she heard a “pop” and immediately had difficulty walking and could not play. Plain films were (-). She used crutches for a week. PT began three days after the incident. Objective: Pain limited R squat to 50 plantarflexed (ie no dorsiflexion on the R). Symptoms were localized to the anterior talofibular ligament and the peroneal tendon below the lateral malleolus. (*=pain) Initial Eval Re-Eval STJn WB Dorsiflexion -5 R/ 21 L 19 R / 21 L Single leg squat knee angle Unable to do / L 55 R 65 / L 70 Calf raise 2 R/ 24 L 28 R/ 30 L 3” quad dom step down (eccentric ) Unable * 10 # front racked R/ 22 L / 24 Single leg hop 10 sec R/unable L/ 14 B 15 16 reps Lateral lunge Unable * 15# low reach R 19x L 21x Single leg balance rotation 15 sec Unable R 6x L 8x Med/lat 3 step directional change 15 sec 8 feet distance unable* 10 reps Key Findings: Treatment: Terry began ROM in PT 3 days post injury. She received manual grade 1-2 mobilization in pain free ROM. She began AROM and dorsiflexion with strap assist. She followed with 3 dimensional WB soleus/ gastroc stretches in available pain free ROM. She was able to do Partial WB calf raise that week, as well as proprioceptive balance training static, and dynamically progressed to full WB Eyes closed within a week. She started regaining strength within a week and began uneven surface/ BAPS, and stepping soon after that. We used Rock tape to ease the swelling and provide stability as she progressed. After 2 weeks: She was able to join in practice limited to serve receive and serving. She practiced swing skills standing at the net. Outcome: By 4 weeks she had been doing enough agility/ strength and proprioception that she went back to playing with an ankle brace on and no limitations You can trust the Physical Therapists at PEAK PERFORMANCE to do a thorough evaluation, to search for related but underlying contributing factors to kinetic chain dysfunction, and to design exercise progressions that both respect tissue healing and creatively use biomechanics principles to prevent symptoms and optimize carryover to your patients' functional goals. Call us at 218-0240 to discuss your patient's specific needs. Peak Performance is just minutes away from your patients in Penfield, Fairport, Pittsford, Brighton, Rochester and, of course, East Rochester. We promise Individualized, hands-on and biomechanically appropriate Physical Therapy for your patients. No "one-size-fits-all" approaches. We WILL go the extra mile and "dig deeper" to discover underlying causes for injury risk and delayed recovery using the most advanced Evidence Based methods available and, we’re able to make unique adjustments to exercise prescriptions to speed the return to function and to minimize or prevent symptoms from interfering. No surprises. No hassles. Confident your patient is in the right place. COME VISIT US AT 161 E Commercial St Just 1 mile off 490 exit (585) 218-0240 www.PeakPTRochester.com
  2. After months of a long nagging ankle injury, Mike gave me the tools to get comprehensively healthy and help me return to basketball stronger than before. In addition to improving the condition of my injury, I feel my body is better equipped for functionality and the injury prevention required to compete at a high level. Thanks for your dedication to detail, Mike and Rachele! Thomas “Tommy” Eastman June 4, 2019
  3. Allison has provided a great service to me as I dealt with some pain and structural problems with my feet. She gave me tools to address my problem and also a sense of purpose as she motivated me along the way. Thank you for helping me, Allison! ! George Vanderzwaag May 16, 2019
  4. Before coming to Peak, any slight running, no matter the activity, would cause pain in my ankles, shins and knees. After just a few weeks of working with Andrew and company, I was able to do my favorite activities with little to no pain. Now I can do just about anything with no pain and all thanks to Andrew, Margaret and Jenna (his interns) for helping me to get to where I am. ~ William Rauber May 4, 2019
  5. I was treated for pain in my right foot and a small stress fracture to my ankle. I started in the fall with limited ability to even stand without pain. Now I am able to run and work out daily. I am still making progress every day. With Allison’s direction and encouragement, and my hard work, I have gained strength in my calfs, ankles and legs. Allison has helped me realize a lot about my body and has given me so much advice and exercises that I will continue to work on. I’ve learned that this is a process and to never give up. Thanks, Allison, for helping me turn this around! Natalie Memmel May 7, 2019
  6. Thank God for knowing Allison and getting a quick referral to Peak Performance. I was able to quickly get an appointment with Andrew and his intern, Margaret. This dynamic duo was able to take me from a constant dull pain and tenderness in my ankle to less pain on DAY ONE. From there, they taught me to be more mindful of my movements and gave me exercises to do outside of our sessions. With each visit, I was getting stronger, more mobile and really understood my movement. I work on my feet most days and I still feel great. This team was patient and kind, and took their time to really teach me how to move. I highly recommend Andrew and Peak Performance PT! Morgan Aldridge May 2, 2019
  7. While playing basketball in late June someone landed on my ankle, leaving me with a pretty bad sprain. I did the typical rest, ice, compression and elevation, and took it easy. As a recreational basketball and lacrosse player, and generally very active person, the lack of exercise and progress with my recovery was pretty frustrating. I finally came to Peak Performance in mid August and started working with Allison. She was incredibly thorough and receptive, both pushing me and being careful to make sure everything felt right. I started to see my balance and strength increase each week. By the end of September, I felt like I was ready to get back in the court. I am incredibly happy with Allison and everyone at Peak Performance. If you need PT, THIS is the place to come! Ted W. September 25, 2018
  8. Perceived ankle Instability not correlated to functional testing CURRENT EVIDENCE Madsen LP et al, Assessing Outcomes in People with Chronic Ankle Instability: The Ability of Functional Performance Tests to Measure Deficits in Physical Function and Perceived Instability. JOSPT. 48(5), 2018. 372-380. by Mike Napierala, PT, SCS, CSCS, FAFS Case type: Lab-based cross-sectional study Background: Lateral ankle sprains are the most common musculoskeletal injury in active individuals and can result in Chronic Ankle Instability (CAI). No outcome measure to assess improvement in perceived instability over rehabilitation has been studied. This study aimed to find Functional Performance Tests (FPTs) that differentiate unilateral CAI from healthy controls and accurately identify functional and perceived instability differences in subjects with CAI. Methods: Twenty-four matched healthy control group subjects (10 male and 14 female) and 24 subjects with unilateral CAI (10 males, 14 females) from a university were studied. The 30cm 10x side-sihde op, 6 meter crossover and figure 8 hop tests were timed. The 3x crossover and the lateral hop were distance based measurements. A 0 to 100 VAS was used to measure perceived instability after three successful trails on each test, to the question, “How unstable did your ankle feel during the test?” Results: The ANOVA found no significant difference for mean scores between the CAI’s involved limb and the control group’s dominant limb. The MANOVA showed no significant differences in physical function symmetry values between control and CAI groups. The CAI group perceived more instability on their involved side for the side hop (P=0.02), 6 meter crossover hop (P=0.003), lateral hop (P=0.007), and figure 8 (P=0.008). No differences in perceived instability occurred for the triple crossover hop (P=0.07). Conclusion: Evaluating functional improvements alone may be inadequate at measuring the success of rehabilitation for CAI, since perceived instability feelings remain despite a lack of differences in hop testing. Clinicians should consider implementing a VAS for perceived instability during hop testing of patients with CAI. THE PEAK PERFORMANCE PERSPECTIVE Chronic ankle instability obviously affects a large number of individuals, especially those involved in active lifestyle or athletic endeavors. Why so many who suffer from a seemingly simple “ankle sprain” end up progressing over time to CAI is a mystery of sorts. It is a fascinating finding in this Madsen et al study that CAI subjects perceived instability despite no significant deficits in FPT findings. This certainly merits further examination. There are a number of potential contributing factors. Madsen et al research based findings connected to what differentiates CAI from normal ankles. That includes reduced eversion force, altered neural excitability, delayed peroneal reaction time, and poor dynamic balance. This study notwithstanding, it remains unknown what connection may exist between other physical parameters and/or different performance tests and subjective instability. We also lack understanding on what threshold might exist for a given physical deficit that corresponds to subjective instability. The possibility remains too that fear components play some primary role separate from physical impairment itself. There are a number of issues with Madsen’s study that must be considered when reviewing their data and conclusions. Subjects were allowed to retest if “errors” occurred such as landing on a line or using the opposite foot. We would submit that after adequate warm up the fact that such errors might occur potentially is the very indicator of measurable deficit that these authors suggest did not exist For example, it is possible that some level of “training effect” occurred with repeated retesting when errors happened during testing. When we do performance tests like a timed side-to-side hop or rotational hop those errors are included in the net value by subtracting the number of misses from the total contacts noted. Being unable to accurately negotiate a predetermined width or locations during hop testing may indicate the proprioceptive shortcomings contributing to CAI. Another confounding variable is control of compensatory movements/posturing. We have anecdotally found that on hop testing there can be substantial differences in limb symmetry scores when arms are free vs fixed. Patients know that symmetry and high performance are the goal of testing. There remains at least an unconscious desire to perform well and oftentimes to “pass” testing required for return to play (RTP). We have found that fixing hands on the pelvis during tests such as vertical, triple hop and triple crossover tests removes a large source of compensation and potentially provides a more accurate indicator of actual lower limb capacity/ability. Madsen et al do not indicate any such control within their testing, which risks Type II error. Traditional rehabilitation for CAI oftentimes utilizes unstable base training, such as balancing on a BOSU ball or SLB with ball tosses against a rebounder. While these certainly provide proprioceptive or neuromuscular stimuli they oftentimes lack authenticity to a given patient’s actual life demands. Stimulating an unstable ankle via reaching tasks and reactive drills using the opposite leg or the upper extremities, where the proximal body is moving over the foot, provides a unique and authentic “top-down” proprioceptive stimulus. “Bottom-up” stimuli of unstable platforms moving the foot under the body or “impact” dynamic stability challenges are another unique and authentic stimulus. But the “authentic” part of that, in deference to our appreciation for Specificity of Training, is highly dependent on typical or greatest demands of that patient and not a protocol-like sequence easily applied to all CAI patients. Oftentimes multiplanar “top-down “ and also impact reactive dynamic stability training are lacking. Too often we see failed cases where patients were jumped from stationary single leg stance balance drills right into plyometric or agility type drills without progressive neuromuscular training. Very specific frontal and transverse plane stimuli must be introduced to challenge proprioceptive systems in conjunction with functional strengthening. Simple NWB resistive band training of the peroneals by “open chain” eversion or common lower extremity strengthening such as lunges or step ups are inadequate in their common form as authentic stimuli to properly prepare an ankle with CAI for successful movements and stability. While the desired end goal for testing would include some form of “unexpected” reaction to an inversion stimulus from cutting or landing, that is nearly impossible at present in most clinical environments. Therefore it is incumbent on rehabilitation specialists to first adequately train patients in varied and functionally authentic ways with an appreciation especially of their typical and most intensive risk situations. Then testing must include dynamic multiplanar impact and balance testing that limits compensations that risk lowering the quality of data and related Type II errors, and includes performance errors that reflect the inability of that CAI limb to perform well. Madsen et al have done an excellent job in persuading us that obtaining subjective ratings of instability has value in addition to objective measures but their lack of optimal testing procedures clouds the ability to confidently accept that patients with CAI may oftentimes not have actual physical performance deficits. Below is an example of a recurrent ankle sprain case that included functional progressions of ROM, strength, balance, and impact progression training. The functional performance tests utilized include several measurable indicators of power (acceleration and deceleration) and the ability to do so within the higher risk frontal plane specifically. We will begin incorporating a subjective instability VAS in the future based on this study’s findings. THE PEAK PERFORMANCE EXPERIENCE Will's testimonial: “I’ve improved my agility and my ankle pain is gone.” History: 16 yo male travel soccer player and recreational runner with h/o > 3x prior inversion MOI (L) ankle sprains, had forced inversion MOI in soccer when foot landed on back of goal, heard “pop”. 5d on crutches, no XR taken. Seen by pediatrician. Subjective: Began PT 16 days following injury. 3.5/10 pain rating, self reported 70% function and FADI sport 63%. Pt c/o sx running, uneven surfaces, inclines Objective: Initial Evaluation DC Re-Eval (1 mo) AROM ever 20/70 30/70 Inv 150/300 200/300 SLR PF-Inv nerve mob (+) by 300 (-) by 650 Isometric Ever 47% NT FWB STJn Squat DF 150/250 300/NT FWB PF 270/550 500/NT SLB FWB inv tolerance 53% 100% PF reps NT 25# wt 79% Vertical Hop NT 100% Lateral Hop 20cm 10sec NT 100% Treatment: Joint mobilization eversion and DF (NWB & WB) Stretching, including WB STJ eversion and DF done in key STJ neutral positioning – first static and later with dynamic frontal and transverse plane demands Proprioception/balance work, avoiding inversion and later advancing to reactive deceleration into inversion demands along with combined impact Functional strengthening including evertors/hip abd’s re MOI kinetic chain, promoting eversion capacity for shock absorption, increasing toward frontal and transverse plane work Speed/power transition prior to agility and impact jumping/landing drills…progression to wak/jog and agility work. Results: Pt seen 10x total over 4+ weeks. Had increased to running 4 mi including hills, soccer practice including full scrimmaging without issues. Self reported painfree, fxn rating 100% and FADI Sport at 91% upon DC. You can trust the Physical Therapists at PEAK PERFORMANCE to do a thorough evaluation, to search for related but underlying contributing factors to kinetic chain dysfunction, and to design exercise progressions that both respect tissue healing and creatively use biomechanics principles to prevent symptoms and optimize carryover to your patients' functional goals. Call us at 218-0240 to discuss your patient's specific needs. Mike Napierala, PT, SCS, CSCS, FAFS Peak Performance is just minutes away from your patients in Penfield, Fairport, Pittsford, Brighton, Rochester and, of course, East Rochester. We promise Individualized, hands-on and biomechanically appropriate Physical Therapy for your patients. No "one-size-fits-all" approaches. We WILL go the extra mile and "dig deeper" to discover underlying causes for injury risk and delayed recovery using the most advanced Evidence Based methods available and, we’re able to make unique adjustments to exercise prescriptions to speed the return to function and to minimize or prevent symptoms from interfering. No surprises. No hassles. Confident your patient is in the right place.  COME VISIT US AT 161 E Commercial St Just 1 mile off 490 exit (585) 218-0240 www.PeakPTRochester.com
  9. I twisted my ankle quite badly just two months before I was supposed to leave for boot camp. Desperate to regain full function of my ankle, I came to Peak Performance. Karen was able to help me recover from my injury, strengthen my lower body, and push me in new ways, all while I could still train in the pool and the weight room. I’m pretty much back to 100% and am totally ready for boot camp! Ella S. June 13, 2018
  10. I started out with stiff neck and pain and numbness on my left side (neck and arm). Karen stretched out my neck and back each visit and that, coupled with cranial/sacral massages, relieved my discomfort. (Along with my PT exercises. J) I don’t experience numbness anymore! The secondary issue was with my left outside ankle-pain with walking on uneven surfaces. Bending and squatting became difficult due to extreme tightness in both of my ankles, particularly on my left. I have noticed marked improvement in my ability to bend and also an increase in better balance. Works in progress, but I believe the PT exercises will continue to help with my overall flexibility and balance. Erin S. April 5, 2018
  11. My ankle injury was more than an annoyance. It affected my normal activities, including work. Thanks to Peak Performance’s expertise I was able to get back to the full functionality I had before the injury. Mike is truly excellent in his field. John M. February 23, 2018
  12. I had knee surgery two years ago and recently reinjured my knee stepping back off some stairs. Karen and Allison helped me with orthotic buildups to reorient my foot and ankle, which helped with knee alignment. We worked on gaining strength and flexibility and I’m back to my activities pain free! Thank you Karen and Allison and everyone at Peak Performance! Nancy M. February 15, 2018
  13. The ultrasound took away most of my swelling. The exercises increased my mobility with less pain. The stretches decreased my pain and now my pain doesn’t wake me during the night. Thank you! Patricia F. D.
  14. I came to Peak Performance in October with a sprained ankle from volleyball. My knee had been sore for a while and Karen said I also had tendinitis. Karen helped me regain the use of both my knee and ankle. The exercises she showed me helped me get back to playing my sports. Thank you so much Karen! Ryan H. January 8, 2018
  15. I started at Peak Performance because of a multi-fractured ankle with all the ligaments torn from a kickball accident over the summer. After my surgery, I couldn’t do my normal life activities such as running and horseback riding without pain and major swelling. After about two months’ PT with Mike, I am now able to do all of my favorite activities pain free and without swelling! I can see why I was referred here by two different friends who call the physical therapists here “miracle workers.” Thank you so much to Mike and the staff here; you are truly the best! Alexandra C. January 3, 2018
  16. Before I came to PT, my right ankle was really weak and it was painful to run, jump and kick a soccer ball. Now I feel stronger and am able to do those things better than before. It was great to be able to do all my sports and still get better quickly. Thanks for everything, Mike! Delaney M. Nov. 15, 2017
  17. I was born with spina bifida and my left foot and ankle are numb; because of this, I had a lot of weakness in my leg. I play drums at my church and youth group and wanted to improve my speed in my left foot to get better and faster. I also had a lot of trouble walking and sort of walked with a limp. Karen was very knowledgeable and helped me a lot. I’ve noticed that my leg has strengthened, my balance is better, and my foot speed is better. I am very thankful for Peak Performance and their wonderful staff! Elijah P. October 26, 2017
  18. I came to Peak Performance because I began having ankle pain. I had sprained and rolled both ankles in the past and the current pain was preventing me from performing at full capacity during basketball season. I experienced pain while running, jumping, and walking for extended periods of time. The pain was caused by the tightness of my Achilles tendons and that also put me at risk of developing tendonitis in my ankles. After coming to Peak Performance and working with Andrew, my performance on the court and on the softball field improved dramatically! I began having less pain and more mobility due to the exercises and stretches that I was taught. Thanks to Andrew and Peak Performance, I’m now playing even better than I was previously! Both Andrew and all the staff at Peak Performance are great and helped me to become even better than I was before. Thanks for everything! Samantha F. September 25, 2017
  19. When I first came to Peak Performance, I was on crutches and my ankle was causing me a lot of pain. With Andrew’s help and a lot of stretching and reps, I was back on my feet in weeks. Months later, after a few more ankle sprains along the way, I feel 100%, and I am excited to start off the soccer season with a pain-free ankle. Thank you, Andrew, for all of your help and support! Jacob V. August 29, 2017
  20. Before PT, I had trouble running, jumping, walking…anything that involved my ankle. After the first few appointments, I was able to do so much more without any pain. After 2 ½ months, I am now able to participate fully in football, and there is NO PAIN in anything I do! Thank you! Carson H. August 30, 2017