ArticleJournal of athletic training2024
Assessments Used by Athletic Trainers to Decide Return-to-Activity Readiness in Patients With an Ankle Sprain.
Article in Journal of athletic training, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quadriceps-Strength-Testing Practices and Barriers During Return to Sport After ACL Reconstruction: A Survey of College Athletic Trainers.Journal of athletic training · 2025Article
- Restoring ankle dorsiflexion range of motion in athletes: an individualized clinical decision-making system.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2025Article
- Targeting visual-sensory and cognitive impairments following lateral ankle sprains: a practical framework for functional assessment across the return-to-sport continuum-Part 1. Sensory reweighting and cognitive impairments: what are we really talking about and why clinicians should consider central alterations in return to sport criteria.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2025Review
- Influences of Athletic Trainers' Return-to-Activity Assessments for Patients With an Ankle Sprain.Journal of athletic training · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextAthletic 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.
objectivesTo identify ATs' methods for determining patients' return-to-activity readiness after an ankle sprain and demographic characteristics of the ATs and their methods.
settingOnline survey.
designCross-sectional study. PATIENTS OR OTHER
participantsWe 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.
resultsPain, 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.
conclusionsBefore 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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.