Consensus in chronic ankle instability: Aetiology, assessment, surgical indications and place for arthroscopy

To test the Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool (CAIT), a 9-item 30-point scale, for measuring severity of functional ankle instability. Cross-sectional study. General community. Volunteer sample of 236 subjects. Not applicable. Concurrent validity by comparison with the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS) and a visual analog scale (VAS) of global perception of ankle instability by using the Spearman rho. Construct validity and internal reliability with Rasch analysis using goodness-of-fit statistics for items and subjects, separation of subjects, correlation of items to the total scale, and a Cronbach alpha equivalent. Discrimination score for functional ankle instability by maximizing the Youden index and tested for sensitivity and specificity. Test-retest reliability by intraclass correlation coefficient, model 2,1 (ICC(2,1)). There were significant correlations between the CAIT and LEFS (rho=.50, P 0.5; item reliability index, .99). The threshold CAIT score was 27.5 (Youden index, 68.1); sensitivity was 82.9% and specificity was 74.7%. Test-retest reliability was excellent (ICC(2,1)=.96). CAIT is a simple, valid, and reliable tool to measure severity of functional ankle instability.

To determine the rate of ankle injury and examine risk factors of ankle injuries in mainly recreational basketball players. Injury observers sat courtside to determine the occurrence of ankle injuries in basketball. Ankle injured players and a group of non-injured basketball players completed a questionnaire. A total of 10 393 basketball participations were observed and 40 ankle injuries documented. A group of non-injured players formed the control group (n = 360). The rate of ankle injury was 3.85 per 1000 participations, with almost half (45.9%) missing one week or more of competition and the most common mechanism being landing (45%). Over half (56.8%) of the ankle injured basketball players did not seek professional treatment. Three risk factors for ankle injury were identified: (1) players with a history of ankle injury were almost five times more likely to sustain an ankle injury (odds ratio (OR) 4.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.95 to 12.48); (2) players wearing shoes with air cells in the heel were 4.3 times more likely to injure an ankle than those wearing shoes without air cells (OR 4.34, 95% CI 1.51 to 12.40); (3) players who did not stretch before the game were 2.6 times more likely to injure an ankle than players who did (OR 2.62, 95% CI 1.01 to 6.34). There was also a trend toward ankle tape decreasing the risk of ankle injury in players with a history of ankle injury (p = 0.06). Ankle injuries occurred at a rate of 3.85 per 1000 participations. The three identified risk factors, and landing, should all be considered when preventive strategies for ankle injuries in basketball are being formulated.

During one year all ankle inversion injuries seen at the acute ward of our institution were divided into grades of severity and classified according to the maximal area of tenderness at the time of clinical examination. Seven years later 648 of the subjects (91%) evaluated their ankle with the help of a questionnaire. Location of maximal tenderness at the time of injury was: lateral fibular ligaments 61%, lateral midfoot ligaments 24%, base of the fifth metatarsal/peroneal tendons 5% and combined lesions 8%. 39% were considered minor, 46% were moderate, and 15% severe. All cases followed a functional treatment protocol. Seven years post- injury 32% reported chronic complaints of pain, swelling or recurrent sprains. 72% of the subjects with residual disability reported that they were functionally impaired by their ankle - in most cases a question of not performing sports at a desired level. 4% experienced pain at rest and were severely disabled. 19% were bothered by repeated inversion injuries - 43% of these subjects felt that they could compensate by using an external ankle support. There was no correlation between the severity of the sprain as judged at the time of injury and the frequency of residual disability or between the area of maximal tenderness at the time of injury and the area of maximal pain at the time of follow-up.