Chad P Coles1, Paul Tornetta2, William T Obremskey3, Clay A Spitler4, Jaimo Ahn5, Gudrun Mirick6, Peter Krause7, Arvind Nana8, Andres Rodriguez-Buitrago3. 1. Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Boston University Medical Center, Boston, MA. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN. 4. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS. 5. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA. 6. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hennepin County Medical Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN. 7. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA. 8. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, John Peter Smith, Fort Worth, TX.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To describe current practice patterns of orthopaedic trauma experts regarding the management of ankle fractures, to review the current literature, and to provide recommendations for care based on a standardized grading system. DESIGN: Web-based survey. PARTICIPANTS: Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA) members. METHODS: A 27-item web-based questionnaire was advertised to members of the OTA. Using a cross-sectional survey study design, we evaluated the preferences in diagnosis and treatment of ankle fractures. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-six of 1967 OTA members (8.4%) completed the survey (16% of active members). There is considerable variability in the preferred method of diagnosis and treatment of ankle fractures among the members surveyed. Most responses are in keeping with best evidence available. CONCLUSIONS: Current controversy remains in the management of ankle fractures. This is reflected in the treatment preferences of the OTA members who responded to this survey. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level V. See Instructions for authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
OBJECTIVES: To describe current practice patterns of orthopaedic trauma experts regarding the management of ankle fractures, to review the current literature, and to provide recommendations for care based on a standardized grading system. DESIGN: Web-based survey. PARTICIPANTS: Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA) members. METHODS: A 27-item web-based questionnaire was advertised to members of the OTA. Using a cross-sectional survey study design, we evaluated the preferences in diagnosis and treatment of ankle fractures. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-six of 1967 OTA members (8.4%) completed the survey (16% of active members). There is considerable variability in the preferred method of diagnosis and treatment of ankle fractures among the members surveyed. Most responses are in keeping with best evidence available. CONCLUSIONS: Current controversy remains in the management of ankle fractures. This is reflected in the treatment preferences of the OTA members who responded to this survey. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level V. See Instructions for authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Authors: Kiran J Agarwal-Harding; Ami Kapadia; Leonard Ngoie Banza; Mabvuto Chawinga; Nyengo Mkandawire; John Y Kwon Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2021-02-17 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Ramy Khojaly; Ruairí Mac Niocaill; Muhammad Shahab; Matthew Nagle; Colm Taylor; Fiachra E Rowan; May Cleary Journal: Trials Date: 2021-05-27 Impact factor: 2.279