Kerkhoffs G M M J, Rowe B H, Assendelft W J J, Kelly K, Struijs P A A, van Dijk C N
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Academic Medical Center, G4-259, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002(3):CD003762. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003762.
BACKGROUND: Acute lateral ankle ligament injuries (ankle sprains) are common problems in acute medical care. The treatment variation observed for the acutely injured lateral ankle ligament complex suggests a lack of evidence-based management strategies for this problem. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to assess the effectiveness of methods of immobilisation for acute lateral ankle ligament injuries and to compare immobilisation with functional treatment methods. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group specialised register (December 2001); the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2001), MEDLINE (1966-May 2000), EMBASE (1988-May 2000), reference lists of articles, and contacted organisations and researchers in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing either different types of immobilisation or immobilisation versus functional treatments for injuries to the lateral ligament complex of the ankle in adults were included. Trials which investigated the treatment of chronic instability or post-surgical treatment were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were independently extracted by two authors. Where appropriate, results of comparable studies were pooled using fixed effects models. Individual and pooled statistics were reported as relative risks with 95% confidence intervals for dichotomous outcomes and weighted (WMD) or standardised (SMD) mean differences and 95% confidence intervals for continuous outcome measures. Heterogeneity between trials was tested using a standard chi-squared test. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-one trials involving 2184 participants were included. The mean validity score of the included trials increased from 9.1 (SD 3.0) to 10 (SD 2.9) after retrieving further information (maximum 18 points). Statistically significant differences in favour of functional treatment when compared with immobilisation were found for seven outcome measures: more patients returned to sport in the long term (relative risk (RR) 1.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.22 to 2.86); the time taken to return to sport was shorter (WMD 4.88 (days), 95% CI 1.50 to 8.25); more patients had returned to work at short term follow-up (RR 5.75, 95% CI 1.01 to 32.71); the time taken to return to work was shorter (WMD 8.23 days, 95% CI 6.31 to 10.16); fewer patients suffered from persistent swelling at short term follow-up (RR 1.74, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.59); fewer patients suffered from objective instability as tested by stress X-ray (WMD 2.60, 95% CI 1.24 to 3.96); and patients treated functionally were more satisfied with their treatment (RR 1.83, 95% CI 1.09 to 3.07). A separate analysis of trials that scored 50 per cent or more in quality assessment found a similar result for time to return to work only (WMD (days) 12.89, 95% CI 7.10 to 18.67). No significant differences between varying types of immobilisation, immobilisation and physiotherapy or no treatment were found, apart from one trial where patients returned to work sooner after treatment with a soft cast. In all analyses performed, no results were significantly in favour of immobilisation. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Functional treatment appears to be the favourable strategy for treating acute ankle sprains when compared with immobilisation. However, these results should be interpreted with caution, as most of the differences are not significant after exclusion of the low quality trials. Many trials were poorly reported and there was variety amongst the functional treatments evaluated.
背景:急性外侧踝关节韧带损伤(踝关节扭伤)是急性医疗护理中的常见问题。对于急性损伤的外侧踝关节韧带复合体观察到的治疗差异表明,针对该问题缺乏基于证据的管理策略。 目的:本综述的目的是评估急性外侧踝关节韧带损伤固定方法的有效性,并将固定与功能治疗方法进行比较。 检索策略:我们检索了Cochrane肌肉骨骼损伤小组专门注册库(2001年12月);Cochrane对照试验注册库(Cochrane图书馆,2001年第4期),MEDLINE(1966年 - 2000年5月),EMBASE(1988年 - 2000年5月),文章参考文献列表,并联系了该领域的组织和研究人员。 入选标准:纳入比较不同类型固定方法或固定与功能治疗方法治疗成人踝关节外侧韧带复合体损伤的随机和半随机对照试验。排除研究慢性不稳定治疗或术后治疗的试验。 数据收集与分析:由两位作者独立提取数据。在适当情况下,使用固定效应模型汇总可比研究的结果。个体和汇总统计数据报告为二分类结局的相对风险及95%置信区间,连续结局测量的加权(WMD)或标准化(SMD)均值差异及95%置信区间。使用标准卡方检验测试试验间的异质性。 主要结果:纳入了涉及2184名参与者的21项试验。在获取更多信息后(最高18分),纳入试验的平均效度评分从9.1(标准差3.0)提高到10(标准差2.9)。与固定治疗相比,在七个结局指标上发现功能治疗具有统计学显著差异:更多患者长期恢复运动(相对风险(RR)1.86,95%置信区间(CI)1.22至2.86);恢复运动所需时间更短(WMD 4.88(天),95% CI 1.50至8.25);更多患者在短期随访时恢复工作(RR 5.75,95% CI 1.01至32.71);恢复工作所需时间更短(WMD 8.23天,95% CI 6.31至10.16);短期随访时肿胀持续的患者更少(RR 1.74,95% CI 1.17至2.59);应力X线检查显示客观不稳定的患者更少(WMD 2.60,95% CI 1.24至3.96);接受功能治疗的患者对治疗更满意(RR 1.83,95% CI 1.09至3.07)。对质量评估得分达到50%或更高的试验进行单独分析时,仅在恢复工作时间方面发现了类似结果(WMD(天)12.89,95% CI 7.10至18.67)。除了一项试验中患者使用软石膏治疗后恢复工作更快外,未发现不同类型固定方法、固定与物理治疗或不治疗之间存在显著差异。在所有进行的分析中,没有结果明显支持固定治疗。 综述作者结论:与固定治疗相比,功能治疗似乎是治疗急性踝关节扭伤的有利策略。然而,这些结果应谨慎解释,因为排除低质量试验后,大多数差异并不显著。许多试验报告不佳,且所评估的功能治疗方法存在差异。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013-3-28
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007-4-18
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005-7-20
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2001-9
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-2-10
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2024-10-4
Orthop J Sports Med. 2021-8-19
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2022-12
World J Orthop. 2020-12-18