Copyright
©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Orthop. Oct 18, 2025; 16(10): 108858
Published online Oct 18, 2025. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v16.i10.108858
Published online Oct 18, 2025. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v16.i10.108858
Table 1 Peak Torque variables for the four movements studied (n = 200)
| Range of motion | Average | Median | SD | P value | |
| Eversion | Dominant | 28.7 | 28.3 | 9.8 | < 0.001 |
| Non-dominant | 31.2 | 30.6 | 10.8 | ||
| Inversion | Dominant | 34.6 | 31.8 | 12.2 | 0.466 |
| Non-dominant | 35.1 | 33.4 | 11,.0 | ||
| Extension | Dominant | 47.9 | 48.1 | 14.3 | 0.029 |
| Non-dominant | 49.4 | 50.5 | 14.3 | ||
| Flexion | Dominant | 136.4 | 140.0 | 43.5 | < 0.001 |
| Non-dominant | 144.0 | 146.8 | 43.7 | ||
Table 2 Agonist/antagonist ratios for left and right ankle and overall values (n = 200)
| Agonist/antagonist ratios | Average | Median | SD | CV, % | Min | Max | CI | |
| Evertors/invertors ratio | Left | 81.8 | 79.0 | 22.6 | 28 | 45.0 | 173.0 | 4.4 |
| Right | 95.8 | 96.0 | 19.9 | 21 | 53.0 | 160.0 | 3.9 | |
| Overall | 88.8 | 86.0 | 22.4 | 25 | 45.0 | 173.0 | 3.1 | |
| Extensors/flexors ratio | Left | 36.2 | 36.0 | 9.6 | 26 | 17.0 | 69.0 | 1.9 |
| Right | 36.1 | 36.0 | 8.9 | 25 | 15.0 | 73.0 | 1.7 | |
| Overall | 36.1 | 36.0 | 9.2 | 26 | 15.0 | 73.0 | 1.3 | |
Table 3 Muscle deficiency index values for each movement (n = 200)
| Range of motion | Average | Median | SD | CI | P value |
| Eversion | 8.66 | 9.0 | 16.15 | 3.17 | 0.062 |
| Inversion | 4.20 | 5.5 | 17.75 | 3.48 | |
| Extension | 3.41 | 4.0 | 15.50 | 3.04 | |
| Flexion | 5.18 | 5.5 | 12.82 | 2.51 |
Table 4 Correlation between demographic variables and Muscular Deficiency Index (n = 200)
| Range of motion | Age | Weight | Height | BMI | |
| Eversion | r value | -0.066 | 0.046 | 0.037 | 0.041 |
| P value | 0.514 | 0.654 | 0.717 | 0.686 | |
| Inversion | r value | 0.079 | 0.060 | 0.002 | 0.030 |
| P value | 0.438 | 0.560 | 0.985 | 0.768 | |
| Extension | r value | -0.085 | -0.085 | -0.050 | -0.059 |
| P value | 0.401 | 0.406 | 0.621 | 0.564 | |
| Flexion | r value | 0.027 | -0.049 | -0.004 | 0.026 |
| P value | 0.789 | 0.633 | 0.972 | 0.800 | |
Table 5 Correlation of age and body mass index with peak torque (n = 200)
| Range of motion | Age × movement | P value | BMI × movement | P value | |
| Eversion | Dominant | 0.049 | 0.832 | 0.133 | 0.564 |
| Non-dominant | 0.046 | 0.843 | 0.053 | 0.821 | |
| Inversion | Dominant | 0.130 | 0.575 | 0.189 | 0.413 |
| Non-dominant | 0.132 | 0.567 | 0.042 | 0.858 | |
| Extension | Dominant | -0.177 | 0.444 | 0.102 | 0.660 |
| Non-dominant | -0.199 | 0.388 | 0.046 | 0.845 | |
| Flexion | Dominant | -0.090 | 0.699 | -0.256 | 0.263 |
| Non-dominant | 0.074 | 0.750 | -0.110 | 0.635 | |
Table 6 Peak torque values and gender differences (n = 200)
| Range of motion | Average | Median | SD | CI | n | P value | |
| Eversion | Female | 22.3 | 22.5 | 6.6 | 1.6 | 62 | < 0.001 |
| Male | 33.4 | 33.2 | 9.9 | 1.7 | 138 | ||
| Inversion | Female | 30.0 | 26.7 | 10.0 | 2.5 | 62 | < 0.001 |
| Male | 37.0 | 35.3 | 11.6 | 1.9 | 138 | ||
| Extension | Female | 37.4 | 37.1 | 10.0 | 2.5 | 62 | < 0.001 |
| Male | 53.6 | 54.1 | 13.0 | 2.2 | 138 | ||
| Flexion | Female | 100.4 | 89.3 | 37.2 | 9.3 | 62 | < 0.001 |
| Male | 158.1 | 158.9 | 33.4 | 5.6 | 138 | ||
Table 7 Agonist/antagonist ratio values for the dominant and non-dominant sides (n = 200)
| Agonist/antagonist ratio | Average | Median | SD | CI | P value | |
| Evertors/invertors | Dominant | 86.3 | 82.5 | 25.0 | 4.9 | 0.011 |
| Non-dominant | 91.4 | 92.0 | 19.2 | 3.8 | ||
| Extensors/flexors | Dominant | 36.8 | 36.5 | 10.1 | 2.0 | 0.116 |
| Non-dominant | 35.5 | 36.0 | 8.2 | 1.6 | ||
- Citation: da Fonseca LF, Jeyaraman M, Jeyaraman N, Inojossa TR, Maciel ES, Cesar Netto C, Mansur NS, Astur DC. Normative values of ankle strength and its importance for rehabilitation and return to activity: A cross-sectional study. World J Orthop 2025; 16(10): 108858
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2218-5836/full/v16/i10/108858.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v16.i10.108858
