Bruno Tassignon1, Jo Verschueren1, Eamonn Delahunt2,3, Michelle Smith4, Bill Vicenzino4, Evert Verhagen5, Romain Meeusen6. 1. Faculty of Physical Education and Physiotherapy, Human Physiology Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Pleinlaan 2, 1050, Brussels, Belgium. 2. School of Public Health, Physiotherapy and Sports Science, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. 3. Institute for Sport and Health, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. 4. Division of Physiotherapy, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, Australia. 5. Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam Collaboration on Health and Safety in Sports, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 6. Faculty of Physical Education and Physiotherapy, Human Physiology Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Pleinlaan 2, 1050, Brussels, Belgium. romain.meeusen@vub.be.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review was to identify prospective studies that used a criteria-based return to sport (RTS) decision-making process for patients with lateral ankle sprain (LAS) injury. DESIGN: Systematic review and narrative synthesis. DATA SOURCES: The PubMed (MEDLINE), Web of Science, PEDro, Cochrane Library, SPORTDiscus (EBSCO), ScienceDirect, and Scopus databases were searched to 23 November 2018. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Studies were included if they prospectively applied a criteria-based RTS decision-making process for patients with LAS injury, but were excluded if they merely gathered outcome measures at the RTS time point. Studies were also excluded if patients were recovering from ankle fracture, high ankle sprain, medial ankle sprain, chronic ankle instability or complex ankle injury. RESULTS: No studies were identified that used a criteria-based RTS decision-making process for patients with LAS injury. We were unable to conduct a quantitative synthesis or meta-analysis, therefore we provide a narrative synthesis of relevant questionnaires, as well as clinical and functional assessments commonly used in studies retrieved in the search. CONCLUSION: There are currently no published evidence-based criteria to inform RTS decisions for patients with an LAS injury. Based on our narrative synthesis, we propose a number of variables that could be used to develop a criteria-based RTS decision paradigm. Future research should aim to reach consensus on these variables and apply them to actual RTS decisions within prospective study designs. Furthermore, we suggest that complex systems theory and the RTS continuum could be used to inform the development of an RTS decision-making paradigm for athletes with LAS injury.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review was to identify prospective studies that used a criteria-based return to sport (RTS) decision-making process for patients with lateral ankle sprain (LAS) injury. DESIGN: Systematic review and narrative synthesis. DATA SOURCES: The PubMed (MEDLINE), Web of Science, PEDro, Cochrane Library, SPORTDiscus (EBSCO), ScienceDirect, and Scopus databases were searched to 23 November 2018. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Studies were included if they prospectively applied a criteria-based RTS decision-making process for patients with LAS injury, but were excluded if they merely gathered outcome measures at the RTS time point. Studies were also excluded if patients were recovering from ankle fracture, high ankle sprain, medial ankle sprain, chronic ankle instability or complex ankle injury. RESULTS: No studies were identified that used a criteria-based RTS decision-making process for patients with LAS injury. We were unable to conduct a quantitative synthesis or meta-analysis, therefore we provide a narrative synthesis of relevant questionnaires, as well as clinical and functional assessments commonly used in studies retrieved in the search. CONCLUSION: There are currently no published evidence-based criteria to inform RTS decisions for patients with an LAS injury. Based on our narrative synthesis, we propose a number of variables that could be used to develop a criteria-based RTS decision paradigm. Future research should aim to reach consensus on these variables and apply them to actual RTS decisions within prospective study designs. Furthermore, we suggest that complex systems theory and the RTS continuum could be used to inform the development of an RTS decision-making paradigm for athletes with LAS injury.
Authors: G M Kerkhoffs; B H Rowe; W J Assendelft; K D Kelly; P A Struijs; C N van Dijk Journal: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg Date: 2001-09 Impact factor: 3.067
Authors: Sergio T Fonseca; Thales R Souza; Evert Verhagen; Richard van Emmerik; Natalia F N Bittencourt; Luciana D M Mendonça; André G P Andrade; Renan A Resende; Juliana M Ocarino Journal: Sports Med Date: 2020-10 Impact factor: 11.136
Authors: Brice Picot; Alexandre Hardy; Romain Terrier; Bruno Tassignon; Ronny Lopes; François Fourchet Journal: Front Sports Act Living Date: 2022-05-26
Authors: Astrid Vereijken; Inne Aerts; Jorrit Jetten; Bruno Tassignon; Jo Verschueren; Romain Meeusen; Emiel van Trijffel Journal: J Sports Sci Med Date: 2020-08-13 Impact factor: 2.988
Authors: Thomas Bestwick-Stevenson; Laura A Wyatt; Debbie Palmer; Angela Ching; Robert Kerslake; Frank Coffey; Mark E Batt; Brigitte E Scammell Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2021-04-17 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Filip Gertz Lysdal; Thomas Bandholm; Janne Schurmann Tolstrup; Mikkel Bek Clausen; Stephanie Mann; Pelle Baggesgaard Petersen; Thor Buch Grønlykke; Uwe G Kersting; Eamonn Delahunt; Kristian Thorborg Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2020-08-12 Impact factor: 13.800