Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Developing consensus on clinical assessment of acute lateral ankle sprain injuries: protocol for an international and multidisciplinary modified Delphi process
  1. Daniela S Bossard1,2,
  2. Alexandria Remus1,3,
  3. Cailbhe Doherty3,
  4. Phillip A Gribble4,
  5. Eamonn Delahunt1,2
  1. 1 School of Public Health, Physiotherapy & Sports Science, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
  2. 2 Institute for Sport & Health, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
  3. 3 Insight Centre for Data Analysis, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
  4. 4 College of Health Sciences, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Eamonn Delahunt, School of Public Health, Physiotherapy & Sports Science, University College Dublin, Dublin 4, Ireland; eamonn.delahunt{at}ucd.ie

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Within a year of first-time acute lateral ankle sprain injury, as many as 40% of individuals develop long-term injury-associated symptoms and chronic ankle instability.1 Chronic ankle instability is founded in a combination of mechanical and sensorimotor impairments, which manifest after the injury.2

Before effective management protocols for lateral ankle sprain injuries can be developed and implemented, it is pertinent that a best practice, evidence-based approach to the clinical assessment of acute lateral ankle sprain injury is established. Second to diagnosis of the acute injury, clinical assessment should establish the presence or otherwise of mechanical and sensorimotor impairments that associate with chronic ankle instability. Developing structured, best practice, evidence-based recommendations for the clinical assessment of acute lateral ankle sprain injuries could be achieved by a …

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Contributors All authors have made substantial contributions to this paper. They have all participated in the concept and design, as well as drafting and revising the paper. All authors have read the paper and agreed to submission for publication.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Ethics approval University College Dublin.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.