Context:Stress fractures of the foot and ankle are a common problem encountered by athletes of all levels and ages. These injuries can be difficult to diagnose and may be initially evaluated by all levels of medical personnel. Clinical suspicion should be raised with certain history and physical examination findings.Evidence Acquisition:Scientific and review articles were searched through PubMed (1930-2012) with search terms including stress fractures and 1 of the following: foot ankle, medial malleolus, lateral malleolus, calcaneus, talus, metatarsal, cuboid, cuneiform, sesamoid, or athlete.Study Design:Clinical review.Level of Evidence:Level 5.Results:Stress fractures of the foot and ankle can be divided into low and high risk based upon their propensity to heal without complication. A wide variety of nonoperative strategies are employed based on the duration of symptoms, type of fracture, and patient factors, such as activity type, desire to return to sport, and compliance. Operative management has proven superior in several high-risk types of stress fractures. Evidence on pharmacotherapy and physiologic therapy such as bone stimulators is evolving.Conclusion:A high index of suspicion for stress fractures is appropriate in many high-risk groups of athletes with lower extremity pain. Proper and timely work-up and treatment is successful in returning these athletes to sport in many cases. Low-risk stress fracture generally requires only activity modification while high-risk stress fracture necessitates more aggressive intervention. The specific treatment of these injuries varies with the location of the stress fracture and the goals of the patient.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are key tools when performing clinical research and PROM data are increasingly used to inform clinical decision-making, patient-centered care, health policy and more recently, reimbursement decisions. PROMs must possess particular properties before they are used. Thus purpose of this paper is to give an overview of PROMs, their definition, how their evidence can be assessed, how they should be reported in clinical research, how to choose PROMs, the types of PROMs available in orthopaedics, where these measures can be found, PROMs in orthopaedic clinical practice and what are some key next steps in this field. If PROMs are used in accordance with the guidance in this article, I believe we will gain considerable insight into PROMs in orthopaedics and will advance this field in a way that can contribute to science, improve patient care and save considerable resources. Why Patient Reported Outcome Measures? The development, testing and implementation of tools to aid in the measurement of phenomena in medicine are central to clinical practice and clinical research. Measurements in clinical practice form the basis of diagnosis, prognosis, evaluation and follow-up. Measurements in clinical research allow for the collection of data that afford us the information needed to test specific hypotheses [1]. The field of measurement in medicine includes both psychometrics and clinimetrics [2-4]. But, it has been argued thatthere is little distinction between these two areas [3]. Throughout this paper the term psychometrics will be used and more generally the term measurement to refer to these fields.