Reliability and validity of physical examination tests for the assessment of ankle instability.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q2 REHABILITATION
Amber Beynon, Sylvie Le May, Jean Theroux
{"title":"Reliability and validity of physical examination tests for the assessment of ankle instability.","authors":"Amber Beynon,&nbsp;Sylvie Le May,&nbsp;Jean Theroux","doi":"10.1186/s12998-022-00470-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Clinicians rely on certain physical examination tests to diagnose and potentially grade ankle sprains and ankle instability. Diagnostic error and inaccurate prognosis may have important repercussions for clinical decision-making and patient outcomes. Therefore, it is important to recognize the diagnostic value of orthopaedic tests through understanding the reliability and validity of these tests.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To systematically review and report evidence on the reliability and validity of orthopaedic tests for the diagnosis of ankle sprains and instability.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and Cochrane databases were searched from inception to December 2021. In addition, the reference list of included studies, located systematic reviews, and orthopaedic textbooks were searched. All articles reporting reliability or validity of physical examination or orthopaedic tests to diagnose ankle instability or sprains were included. Methodological quality of the reliability and the validity studies was assessed with The Quality Appraisal for Reliability studies checklist and the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 respectively. We identified the number of times the orthopaedic test was investigated and the validity and/or reliability of each test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, sixteen studies were included. Three studies assessed reliability, eight assessed validity, and five evaluated both. Overall, fifteen tests were evaluated, none demonstrated robust reliability and validity scores. The anterolateral talar palpation test reported the highest diagnostic accuracy. Further, the anterior drawer test, the anterolateral talar palpation, the reverse anterior lateral drawer test, and palpation of the anterior talofibular ligament reported the highest sensitivity. The highest specificity was attributed to the anterior drawer test, the anterolateral drawer test, the reverse anterior lateral drawer test, tenderness on palpation of the proximal fibular, and the squeeze test.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overall, the diagnostic accuracy, reliability, and validity of physical examination tests for the assessment of ankle instability were limited. Physical examination tests should not be used in isolation, but rather in combination with the clinical history to diagnose an ankle sprain. Preliminary evidence suggests that the overall validity of physical examination for the ankle may be better if conducted five days after the injury rather than within 48 h of injury.</p>","PeriodicalId":48572,"journal":{"name":"Chiropractic & Manual Therapies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9764698/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chiropractic & Manual Therapies","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12998-022-00470-0","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction: Clinicians rely on certain physical examination tests to diagnose and potentially grade ankle sprains and ankle instability. Diagnostic error and inaccurate prognosis may have important repercussions for clinical decision-making and patient outcomes. Therefore, it is important to recognize the diagnostic value of orthopaedic tests through understanding the reliability and validity of these tests.

Objective: To systematically review and report evidence on the reliability and validity of orthopaedic tests for the diagnosis of ankle sprains and instability.

Methods: PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and Cochrane databases were searched from inception to December 2021. In addition, the reference list of included studies, located systematic reviews, and orthopaedic textbooks were searched. All articles reporting reliability or validity of physical examination or orthopaedic tests to diagnose ankle instability or sprains were included. Methodological quality of the reliability and the validity studies was assessed with The Quality Appraisal for Reliability studies checklist and the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 respectively. We identified the number of times the orthopaedic test was investigated and the validity and/or reliability of each test.

Results: Overall, sixteen studies were included. Three studies assessed reliability, eight assessed validity, and five evaluated both. Overall, fifteen tests were evaluated, none demonstrated robust reliability and validity scores. The anterolateral talar palpation test reported the highest diagnostic accuracy. Further, the anterior drawer test, the anterolateral talar palpation, the reverse anterior lateral drawer test, and palpation of the anterior talofibular ligament reported the highest sensitivity. The highest specificity was attributed to the anterior drawer test, the anterolateral drawer test, the reverse anterior lateral drawer test, tenderness on palpation of the proximal fibular, and the squeeze test.

Conclusion: Overall, the diagnostic accuracy, reliability, and validity of physical examination tests for the assessment of ankle instability were limited. Physical examination tests should not be used in isolation, but rather in combination with the clinical history to diagnose an ankle sprain. Preliminary evidence suggests that the overall validity of physical examination for the ankle may be better if conducted five days after the injury rather than within 48 h of injury.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

体格检查评估踝关节不稳定性的信度和效度。
临床医生依靠某些身体检查来诊断和分级踝关节扭伤和踝关节不稳定。诊断错误和不准确的预后可能对临床决策和患者预后有重要影响。因此,通过了解这些测试的信度和效度来认识骨科测试的诊断价值是很重要的。目的:系统回顾和报道骨科检查诊断踝关节扭伤和不稳定的信度和效度的证据。方法:检索PubMed、CINAHL、Scopus和Cochrane数据库,检索时间为成立至2021年12月。此外,还检索了纳入研究的参考文献列表、定位系统综述和骨科教科书。所有报道体格检查或骨科检查诊断踝关节不稳定或扭伤的可靠性或有效性的文章均被纳入。信度和效度研究的方法学质量分别用信度研究质量评价检查表和诊断准确性研究质量评价-2进行评估。我们确定了骨科测试被调查的次数以及每次测试的有效性和/或信度。结果:共纳入16项研究。3项研究评估信度,8项评估效度,5项研究两者都评估。总共评估了15项测试,没有一项显示出可靠的信度和效度得分。前外侧距骨触诊试验的诊断准确性最高。此外,前抽屉试验、距骨前外侧触诊、反向前外侧抽屉试验和距腓骨前韧带触诊的灵敏度最高。特异性最高的是前抽屉试验、前外侧抽屉试验、反前外侧抽屉试验、腓骨近端触诊压痛和挤压试验。结论:总体而言,体格检查评估踝关节不稳定的诊断准确性、可靠性和有效性是有限的。体格检查不应单独使用,而应结合临床病史诊断踝关节扭伤。初步证据表明,如果在受伤后5天进行体检,而不是在受伤后48小时内进行体检,踝关节的整体有效性可能会更好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Chiropractic & Manual Therapies
Chiropractic & Manual Therapies Medicine-Complementary and Alternative Medicine
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
15.80%
发文量
48
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: Chiropractic & Manual Therapies publishes manuscripts on all aspects of evidence-based information that is clinically relevant to chiropractors, manual therapists and related health care professionals. Chiropractic & Manual Therapies is an open access journal that aims to provide chiropractors, manual therapists and related health professionals with clinically relevant, evidence-based information. Chiropractic and other manual therapies share a relatively broad diagnostic practice and treatment scope, emphasizing the structure and function of the body''s musculoskeletal framework (especially the spine). The practices of chiropractic and manual therapies are closely associated with treatments including manipulation, which is a key intervention. The range of services provided can also include massage, mobilisation, physical therapies, dry needling, lifestyle and dietary counselling, plus a variety of other associated therapeutic and rehabilitation approaches. Chiropractic & Manual Therapies continues to serve as a critical resource in this field, and as an open access publication, is more readily available to practitioners, researchers and clinicians worldwide.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信