No abstract

The Ottawa ankle rules remain of utmost importance in identifying X-ray eligible patients with acute ankle sprains. The role of the Bernese ankle rules instead of the OAR and the added-value of the tuning fork test and ultrasound in patients with positive OAR are promising but should be confirmed. ABSTRACTBackground Ankle sprain is frequently encountered, both in primary care and in emergency departments. Since 1992, the Ottawa ankle rules (OAR) can assist clinicians in determining whether an X-ray should be performed to exclude a fracture. Several guidelines recommend the use of OAR based on a systematic review from 2003. Ten years later, one can wonder if this recommendation should be changed. Objective To review systematically the current evidence on the most accurate method to assess the fracture risk after an ankle sprain in adults. Methods A methodical search for systematic reviews, meta-analyses and primary studies was carried out in Medline, Cochrane Database of systematic reviews, Embase, Pedro, CINAHL, Medion and specific guideline search engines. At least two independent researchers performed selection, quality appraisal (with validated checklists) and data extraction. Results One systematic review and 21 primary studies were selected. Sensitivity and specificity of the OAR range from 92-100% and from 16-51%, respectively. To improve the OAR specificity, other tools are proposed such as the Bernese ankle rules. Vibrating tuning fork test and ultrasound could be useful in patient with OAR positive to decrease the need for radiographs. No evidence was found in favour of the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or computed tomography (CT) in the acute phase of ankle sprain. Conclusion The findings confirm the value of the OAR at ruling out fractures after an ankle sprain and propose other or additional tools to decrease the need for X-rays.

Following the commitments of the Tallinn Charter, Belgium publishes the second report on the performance of its health system. A set of 74 measurable indicators is analysed, and results are interpreted following the five dimensions of the conceptual framework: accessibility, quality of care, efficiency, sustainability and equity. All domains of care are covered (preventive, curative, long-term and end-of-life care), as well as health status and health promotion. For all indicators, national/regional values are presented with their evolution over time. Benchmarking to results of other EU-15 countries is also systematic. The policy recommendations represent the most important output of the report.

Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

No abstract