Diagnostic accuracy of the Ottawa ankle rule to exclude fractures in acute ankle injuries in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Ankle traumas are common presenting injuries to emergency departments in Australia and worldwide. The Ottawa Ankle Rules (OAR) are a clinical decision tool to exclude ankle fractures, thereby precluding the need for radiographic imaging in patients with acute ankle injury. Previous studies support the OAR as an accurate means of excluding ankle and midfoot fractures, but have included a paediatric population, report both the ankle and mid-foot, or are greater than 5 years old. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to update and assess the existing evidence of the diagnostic accuracy of the Ottawa Ankle Rule (OAR) acute ankle injuries in adults. METHODS: A systematic search and screen of was performed for relevant articles dated 1992 to 2020. Prospective and retrospective studies documenting OAR outcomes by physicians to assess ankle injuries were included. Critical appraisal of included studies was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool. Outcomes related to psychometric data were pooled using random effects or fixed effects modelling to calculate diagnostic performance of the OAR. Between-study heterogeneity was assessed using the Higgins I2 test, with Spearman’s correlation test for threshold effect. RESULTS: From 254 unique studies identified in the screening process, 15 were included, involving 8560 patients from 13 countries. Sensitivity, specificity, negative likelihood ratio, positive likelihood ratio and diagnostic odds ratio were 0.91 (95% CI, 0.89 to 0.92), 0.25 (95% CI, 0.24 to 0.26), 1.47 (95% CI, 1.11 to 1.93), 0.15 (95% CI, 0.72 to 0.29) and 10.95 (95% CI, 5.14 to 23.35) respectively, with high between-study heterogeneity observed (sensitivity: I2 = 94.3%, p < 0.01; specificity: I2 = 99.2%, p < 0.01). Most studies presented with low risk of bias and concern regarding applicability following assessment against QUADAS-2 criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Application of the OAR is highly sensitive and can correctly predict the likelihood of ankle fractures when present, however, lower specificity rates increase the likelihood of false positives. Overall, the use of the OAR tool is supported as a cost-effective method of reducing unnecessary radiographic referral, that should improve efficiency, lower medical costs and reduce waiting times. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-022-05831-7

Adequacy of clinical information in X-ray referrals for traumatic ankle injury with reference to the Ottawa Ankle Rules-a retrospective clinical audit

Study Objective To assess the adequacy of clinical information with reference to the Ottawa Ankle Rules (OAR) in X-ray referrals for adults with traumatic ankle injury in the ED of a South Australian tertiary hospital and report upon referring trends between emergency department clinicians. Methods A retrospective clinical audit of adult ankle X-ray referrals in the emergency department was conducted. Eligible referrals were screened for their adherence to the OAR, patient details, clinical history and referrer. A logistic regression was used to determine the influence of these factors on the likelihood of being referred for X-rays despite not meeting the OAR criteria. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios and their associated confidence intervals were calculated to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the OAR for those referred. Results Out of the 262 eligible referrals, 163 were deemed to have met the criteria for the OAR. Physiotherapists showed the highest OAR compliance of 77.3% and were the most accurate in their use of the rules, with a sensitivity of 0.86. Medical officers, registrars and interns were 2.5 times more likely to still refer a patient for X-ray if they did not meet the OAR criteria, compared to physiotherapists as the baseline. Patient age, duration of injury etc. were not significantly associated with likelihood of referral (even when they did not meet OAR criteria). The overall sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios of the OAR were 0.59 (95% CI [0.47–0.71]), 0.37 (95% CI [0.30–0.44]), 0.93 (95% CI [0.76–1.16]) and 1.10 (95% CI [0.82–1.48]) respectively. Conclusion The results of this audit demonstrated poor sensitivity and moderate compliance by referrers with the rule. Reasonable evidence exists for the implementation of individual and/or institutional-based change strategies to improve clinician compliance and accuracy with use of the OAR

Teaching of manual clinical skills in podiatric medicine: theory and recommendations

In the podiatric medicine profession, there are a variety of manual tasks that require precision and skill beyond what would be usually expected in everyday living. It is the expectation of employers, regulatory bodies, and the public that graduating podiatric physicians sufficiently meet certain minimum competencies for that profession, including those for manual skills. However, teaching and evaluation methods seem to be inconsistent between countries, institutions, and programs. This may be the consequence of uncertainty regarding the safest and most effective methods to do so. A review of available international literature pertaining to psychomotor learning across a range of health professions was undertaken. As a result of this broad review, we present herein the available evidence and make recommendations for the teaching of psychomotor skills in the podiatric medicine profession. Specific aspects considered important include methods of teaching, practice, and feedback.</p

Meta-analysis and forest plot for sub-metatarsal head 2 unloaded total soft tissue depth, non-diabetic and diabetic group 1.

<p>Meta-analysis and forest plot for sub-metatarsal head 2 unloaded total soft tissue depth, non-diabetic and diabetic group 1.</p

Ottawa Ankle Rules: adequacy of clinical information in X-ray referrals for traumatic ankle injury

Ankle and foot injuries are the most commonly presented musculoskeletal injuries in Australian emergency departments,1 with 4667 such presentations in South Australia in 2017–2018.2 The Ottawa Ankle Rules (OAR) are part of a clinical decision-making tool to help clinicians accurately rule out ankle fractures and hence preclude the need for diagnostic X-ray imaging of ankle trauma.3 This instrument has a sensitivity of almost 100% across various studies.3 The rules state that ankle X-rays are only required if the patient experiences malleolar pain and bone tenderness of the posterior distal tibia/medial malleolus tip, the posterior distal fibula/lateral malleolus tip or an inability to weight bear for four steps both immediately and in the emergency department.4In this study, we undertook a retrospective clinical audit of 300 ankle imaging referrals to (i) assess the current usage of the OAR in ruling out ankle fractures in a major metropolitan emergency department in Australia; (ii) evaluate the current concordance rate of scoring with positive findings on radiography and (iii) report on referring trends between professions, including consultants, registrars, physiotherapists and nurse practitioners. Ethics review was not sought because the study met criteria for exemption from such review according to an institutional policy.The outcome measures are characteristics of the included patients, compliance rate with the OAR, overall prevalence of ankle fractures, referring trends and sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio and negative likelihood ratio of the OAR in this study. Formal results are pending but will be available at time of presentation

Consensus-based statements for assessing clinical competency in podiatry-related work integrated learning

Abstract Background The training of undergraduate and graduate-entry podiatry students in Australia and New Zealand includes practical sessions in a simulated and real-life clinical setting and Work Integrated Learning (WIL) comprising professional clinical placements. Student performance during WIL is evaluated by their Clinical Educators using clinical competency tools. Having a standardised and validated clinical assessment tool for WIL in podiatry would facilitate consistency in assessment, promote standardisation between programs, and ensure that all podiatry students are assessed against a set of criteria over the course of their clinical programs to the point of threshold clinical competency. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop a series of consensus-based statements via Delphi technique as the first step towards developing guidelines to direct the assessment of podiatry students during WIL. Methods This study used a three-round modified Delphi consensus method. A panel of 25 stakeholders was sought. Specifically, representation from each of the universities in Australia and New Zealand who provide entry level programs, Clinical Educators, podiatry student representatives, new podiatry graduates and consumers (podiatrists hiring new graduates). The survey for Round 1 aimed for consensus and consisted of five open-ended questions. Questions one to three asked respondents to nominate what they considered were the important elements that needed to be assessed for podiatry students undertaking WIL for: Clinical performance/skills, Communication and Professional behaviour, Question 4 asked respondents to identify further/other elements of importance, whilst Question 5 asked a) how these elements should be evaluated and b) how should overall competency and ability to progress within the program be determined. Round 2 and 3 aimed to gather agreement and the questions were based on the responses from previous rounds. Results Twenty-five participants agreed to participate, 17 females (68%) and eight males (32%). The panel consisted of 10 podiatry educators (40%), nine Clinical Educators (36%), two student representatives (8%), two new podiatry graduates (8%) and two consumers (8%). From the 25 recruited participants, 21 responded to Round one, 18 to Round two and 17 in Round three. At the conclusion of the Delphi survey, 55 statements had reached consensus or agreement. Conclusions This Delphi study is the first of its kind for the podiatry profession to develop consensus-based statements regarding the assessment of WIL. Fifty-five statements pertinent to the assessment of WIL were identified. This is an important first step toward the development of a consistent WIL assessment tool which may be applied across entry-level podiatry programs across Australia and New Zealand

Meta-analysis and forest plot for sub-metatarsal head 4 unloaded total soft tissue depth, non-diabetic and diabetic group 1.

<p>Meta-analysis and forest plot for sub-metatarsal head 4 unloaded total soft tissue depth, non-diabetic and diabetic group 1.</p

Meta-analysis and forest plot for sub-metatarsal head 3 unloaded total soft tissue depth, non-diabetic and diabetic group 1.

<p>Meta-analysis and forest plot for sub-metatarsal head 3 unloaded total soft tissue depth, non-diabetic and diabetic group 1.</p