Purpose: This study aimed to examine the differences in the co-activation of the rectus femoris (RF) and biceps femoris (BF) using the co-contraction index (CI) in aquatic and land environments during a drop-landing task in active and non-active females. Methods:In this casual-comparison study, 10 active and 10 non-active females volunteered to participate. The CI was calculated from recorded surface electromyographic (SEMG) activity of the RF and BF. To calculate CI, the amount of overlap between the linear envelopes of the agonist and antagonist muscles was found and divided by the number of data points. MathLab software (version 10) was used to process row data. Also, 2-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) assessed differences between groups and environments.Results: Results indicated that the CI was not affected by activity level in pre-and post-contact (P>0.05) while it was significantly higher (P<0.05) in land environment compared to the aquatic environment. Conclusion:Our findings show the differences in co-contraction of knee muscles between different environments. Our measure of co-contraction was lower in water compared to land, with no difference between the active and non-active groups. This may indicate that regardless of activity level, an aquatic environment may be an appropriate choice as an early phase in rehabilitation process.

Background and Objectives: Postural control disorder is a common complication in patients with Chronic Ankle Instability (CAI). The present study aimed to investigate the effect of dual cognitive task on postural control behavior with regard to the Center of Pressure (CoP) signal regularity while standing on an unstable surface in athletes with CAI. Methods: In the present study, 58 men participated in two groups of healthy and patients with CAI. The CoP signal was examined in 4 different unstable states on the wobble board located at the center of the force plate. The regularity of the signals recorded from the force plate was investigated using sample entropy in two directions: anterior-posterior and medial-lateral. Results: In both groups, there was a significant difference in CoP’s sample entropy signal when performing a cognitive task with a postural task (P<0.001). There was a significant difference between the two groups in the cognitive task and the single task in the anteroposterior direction while standing on two legs. Conclusion: During dual tasks, the patients with CAI have a more dynamic regularity in the CoP signal than their normal counterparts. In the dual-task condition, more irregularities are observed in the CoP signal of healthy individuals. In unstable conditions, patients with CAI decrease the adaptability of postural control behavior with increasing CoP signal regularity.