McCann Ryan S, Welch Bacon Cailee E, Suttmiller Ashley M B, Gribble Phillip A, Cavallario Julie M
Rehabilitation Sciences, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA.
Department of Interdisciplinary Health Sciences, Arizona School of Health Sciences, A.T. Still University, Mesa.
J Athl Train. 2024 Feb 1;59(2):182-200. doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-0037.22.
Athletic trainers (ATs) often care for patients with ankle sprains. Expert consensus has been established for rehabilitation-oriented assessments (ROASTs) that should be included in ankle-sprain evaluations. However, the methods ATs use to determine return-to-activity readiness after an ankle sprain are unknown.
To identify ATs' methods for determining patients' return-to-activity readiness after an ankle sprain and demographic characteristics of the ATs and their methods.
Online survey.
Cross-sectional study.
We recruited 10 000 clinically practicing ATs. A total of 676 accessed the survey, 574 submitted responses (85% completion rate), and 541 respondents met the inclusion criteria.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): We distributed an online survey to ATs that asked about their assessment of pain, swelling, range of motion, arthrokinematics, strength, balance, gait, functional capacity, physical activity level, and patient-reported outcomes in deciding return to activity. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize participant demographics and frequencies of the assessment measures used by ATs. Chi-square analysis was conducted to identify relationships between the demographics and assessment selection.
Pain, swelling, range of motion, strength, balance, gait, and functional capacity were assessed by 76.2% to 96.7% of ATs. Arthrokinematics, physical activity level, and patient-reported outcomes were assessed by 25.3% to 35.1% of participants. When selecting specific assessment methods, ATs often did not use recommended ROASTs. Athletic trainers with higher degrees, completion of more advanced educational programs, employment in nontraditional settings, more clinical experience, and familiarity with expert consensus recommendations were more likely to use ROASTs.
Before approving return to activity for patients with ankle sprains, ATs did not use some recommended outcomes and assessment methods. Practice in nontraditional settings, more advanced degrees, more clinical experience, and familiarity with expert consensus guidelines appeared to facilitate the use of ROASTs.
运动训练师（ATs）经常护理脚踝扭伤患者。针对脚踝扭伤评估中应包含的以康复为导向的评估（ROASTs）已达成专家共识。然而，运动训练师用于确定脚踝扭伤后患者恢复活动准备情况的方法尚不清楚。
确定运动训练师在脚踝扭伤后确定患者恢复活动准备情况的方法，以及运动训练师的人口统计学特征及其方法。
在线调查。
横断面研究。
我们招募了10000名临床执业运动训练师。共有676人访问了该调查，574人提交了回复（完成率85%），541名受访者符合纳入标准。
我们向运动训练师发放了一份在线调查问卷，询问他们在决定恢复活动时对疼痛、肿胀、活动范围、关节运动学、力量、平衡、步态、功能能力、身体活动水平以及患者报告结果的评估。描述性统计用于描述参与者的人口统计学特征以及运动训练师使用的评估措施的频率。进行卡方分析以确定人口统计学与评估选择之间的关系。
76.2%至96.7%的运动训练师评估了疼痛、肿胀、活动范围、力量、平衡、步态和功能能力。25.3%至35.1%的参与者评估了关节运动学、身体活动水平和患者报告结果。在选择特定评估方法时，运动训练师通常未使用推荐的ROASTs。学历较高、完成更高级教育项目、在非传统环境中工作、临床经验更丰富以及熟悉专家共识建议的运动训练师更有可能使用ROASTs。
在批准脚踝扭伤患者恢复活动之前，运动训练师未使用一些推荐的结果和评估方法。在非传统环境中的实践、更高的学历、更丰富的临床经验以及熟悉专家共识指南似乎有助于使用ROASTs。
