Literature DB >> 12137665

Different functional treatment strategies for acute lateral ankle ligament injuries in adults.

G M M J Kerkhoffs1, P A A Struijs, R K Marti, W J J Assendelft, L Blankevoort, C N van Dijk.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Acute lateral ankle ligament ruptures are common problems in present health care. Early mobilisation and functional treatment are advocated as a preferable treatment strategy. However, functional treatment comprises a broad spectrum of treatment strategies and as of yet no optimal strategy has been identified.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review is to assess different functional treatment strategies for acute lateral ankle ligament ruptures in adults. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group specialised register (December 2001), the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2001), MEDLINE (1966 to May 2000), EMBASE (1980 to May 2000), CURRENT CONTENTS (1993 to 1999), BIOSIS (to 1999), reference lists of articles, and contacted organisations and researchers in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised clinical trials describing skeletally mature individuals with an acute lateral ankle ligament rupture and comparing different functional treatment strategies were evaluated for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed the quality of included trials and extracted relevant data on treatment outcome. Where appropriate, results of comparable studies were pooled. Individual and pooled statistics are reported as relative risks (RR) for dichotomous outcome and (weighted) mean differences (WMD) for continuous outcome measures with 95 per cent confidence intervals (95%CI). Heterogeneity between trials was tested using a standard chi-squared test. MAIN
RESULTS: Nine trials involving 892 participants were included. Lace-up ankle support had significantly better results for persistent swelling at short-term follow up when compared with semi-rigid ankle support (RR 4.19, 95% CI 1.26 to 13.98); elastic bandage (RR 5.48; 95% CI 1.69 to 17.76); and to tape (RR 4.07, 95% CI 1.21 to 13.68). Use of a semi-rigid ankle support resulted in a significantly shorter time to return to work when compared with an elastic bandage (WMD (days) 4.24; 95% CI 2.42 to 6.06); one trial found the use of a semi-rigid ankle support saw a significantly quicker return to sport compared with elastic bandage (RR 9.60; 95% CI 6.34 to 12.86) and another trial found fewer patients reported instability at short-term follow-up when treated with a semi-rigid support than with an elastic bandage (RR 8.00; 95% CI 1.03 to 62.07). Tape treatment resulted in significantly more complications, the majority being skin irritations, when compared with treatment with an elastic bandage (RR 0.11; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.86). No other results showed statistically significant differences. REVIEWER'S
CONCLUSIONS: The use of an elastic bandage has fewer complications than taping but appears to be associated with a slower return to work and sport, and more reported instability than a semi-rigid ankle support. Lace-up ankle support appears to be effective in reducing swelling in the short-term compared with semi-rigid ankle support, elastic bandage and tape. However, definitive conclusions are hampered by the variety of treatments used, and the inconsistency of reported follow-up times. The most effective treatment, both clinically and in costs, is unclear from currently available randomised trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12137665     DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002938

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  26 in total

Review 1.  [Treatment of lateral ankle joint instability. Open or arthroscopic?].

Authors:  M Galla
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 1.000

Review 2.  A Perceptual Framework for Conservative Treatment and Rehabilitation of Ankle Sprains: An Evidence-Based Paradigm Shift.

Authors:  Patrick O McKeon; Luke Donovan
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2019-05-28       Impact factor: 2.860

3.  Evidence-based treatment for ankle injuries: a clinical perspective.

Authors:  Chung-Wei Christine Lin; Claire E Hiller; Rob A de Bie
Journal:  J Man Manip Ther       Date:  2010-03

Review 4.  [Lateral ligament injuries].

Authors:  H Waizy; N Harrasser; K Fehske
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 1.000

Review 5.  Management of acute lateral ankle ligament injury in the athlete.

Authors:  Michel P J van den Bekerom; Gino M M J Kerkhoffs; Graham A McCollum; James D F Calder; C Niek van Dijk
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-10-30       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 6.  Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for treating acute ankle sprains in adults: benefits outweigh adverse events.

Authors:  Michel P J van den Bekerom; Arnout Sjer; Matthijs P Somford; Gythe H Bulstra; Peter A A Struijs; Gino M M J Kerkhoffs
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-01-29       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  Effects of immobilization and remobilization on the ankle joint in Wistar rats.

Authors:  R I Kunz; J G Coradini; L I Silva; G R F Bertolini; R M C Brancalhão; L F C Ribeiro
Journal:  Braz J Med Biol Res       Date:  2014-08-15       Impact factor: 2.590

Review 8.  A systematic review on the treatment of acute ankle sprain: brace versus other functional treatment types.

Authors:  Ellen Kemler; Ingrid van de Port; Frank Backx; C Niek van Dijk
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2011-03-01       Impact factor: 11.136

Review 9.  Effectiveness of additional supervised exercises compared with conventional treatment alone in patients with acute lateral ankle sprains: systematic review.

Authors:  Rogier M van Rijn; John van Ochten; Pim A J Luijsterburg; Marienke van Middelkoop; Bart W Koes; Sita M A Bierma-Zeinstra
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-10-26

10.  Structural abnormalities and persistent complaints after an ankle sprain are not associated: an observational case control study in primary care.

Authors:  John M van Ochten; Marinka C E Mos; Nienke van Putte-Katier; Edwin H G Oei; Patrick J E Bindels; Sita M A Bierma-Zeinstra; Marienke van Middelkoop
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 5.386

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.