Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31470826›Full record

SynthesisBMC musculoskeletal disorders2019

What is the quality of clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of acute lateral ankle ligament sprains in adults? A systematic review.

Toni Green, Grant Willson, Donna Martin, Kieran Fallon

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT06189625 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Mild Ankle Sprain Treatment: Functional Bandaging vs. no Immobilization. Clinical Trial, Randomized, in Pediatric Population

TypeinterventionalSponsorHospital Universitario Infanta LeonorRan2021 to 2022Enrolled113ConditionsMild Ankle SprainArmsControl, Functional bandage
NCT06222229 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Multicentre, Randomized, Clinical Trial in Children With Mild Ankle Sprain: Bandaging vs. no Immobilization

TypeinterventionalSponsorHospital Universitario Infanta LeonorRan2024 to 2024Enrolled150ConditionsPrimary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial or the Focus of the Study Mild Ankle SprainArmsControl, Functional bandage
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Toni GreenANU Medical School, College of Health and Medicine, Australian National University, ACT, Acton, Australia. Toni.Green@canberra.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3143-7777
Grant WillsonDiscipline of Physiotherapy, University of Canberra, ACT, Bruce, 2617, Australia.
Donna MartinElite Rehab and Sports Physiotherapy, Deakin, Canberra, Australia.
Kieran FallonANU Medical School, College of Health and Medicine, Australian National University, ACT, Acton, Australia.
Australian National University · AUSports Medicine Australia · AUUniversity of Canberra · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAcute lateral ankle ligament sprains (LALS) are a common injury seen by many different clinicians. Knowledge translation advocates that clinicians use Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) to aid clinical decision making and apply evidence-based treatment. The quality and consistency of recommendations from these CPGs are currently unknown. The aims of this systematic review are to find and critically appraise CPGs for the acute treatment of LALS in adults.

methodsSeveral medical databases were searched. Two authors independently applied inclusion and exclusion criteria. The content of each CPG was critically appraised independently, by three authors, using the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument online version called My AGREE PLUS. Data related to recommendations for the treatment of acute LALS were abstracted independently by two reviewers.

resultsThis study found CPGs for physicians and physical therapists (Netherlands), physical therapists, athletic trainers, physicians, and nurses (USA) and nurses (Canada and Australia). Seven CPGs underwent a full AGREE II critical appraisal. None of the CPGs scored highly in all domains. The lowest domain score was for domain 5, applicability (discussion of facilitators and barriers to application, provides advice for practical use, consideration of resource implications, and monitoring/auditing criteria) achieving an exceptionally low joint total score of 9% for all CPGs. The five most recent CPGs scored a zero for applicability. Other areas of weakness were in rigour of development and editorial independence.

conclusionsThe overall quality of the existing LALS CPGs is poor and majority are out of date. The interpretation of the evidence between the CPG development groups is clearly not consistent. Lack of consistent methodology of CPGs is a barrier to implementation. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW: Systematic review registered with PROSPERO ( CRD42015025478 ).

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicAdultClinical Decision-MakingEvidence-Based MedicineHumansLateral Ligament, AnkleOrthopedic ProceduresQuality ImprovementSprains and StrainsTreatment OutcomeModalitiesNon-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs)Physical TherapyPhysical Therapy/RehabilitationPhysiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID31470826
PMCPMC6717337
OpenAlexW2970511086

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.