ArticleJournal of athletic training2023
Diagnostic Evaluation of Mechanical Ankle Instability by Comparing Injured and Uninjured Contralateral Ankles Using Arthrometry.
Article in Journal of athletic training, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Is the anterior drawer test still valuable for diagnosing mechanical ankle instability in clinical practice and research?Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextIndividuals with mechanical ankle instability (MAI) have obvious lateral ligament laxity and excessive ankle joint motion beyond the physiological range. Arthrometry has been introduced to quantitatively measure the laxity of the ankle joint. However, the diagnostic accuracy of arthrometry in MAI is still debatable.
objectivesTo (1) evaluate the difference in laxity between bilateral ankles in patients with and those without MAI and (2) calculate the diagnostic accuracy of ankle arthrometry using bilateral comparisons.
designCross-sectional study.
settingResearch laboratory. PATIENTS OR OTHER
participantsA total of 38 individuals with unilateral MAI (age = 31.24 ± 7.90 years, height = 168.93 ± 7.69 cm, mass = 65.72 ± 10.47 kg) and 38 individuals without MAI (control group; age = 32.10 ± 7.10 years, height = 166.59 ± 7.89 cm, mass = 62.93 ± 10.72 kg). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Bilateral ankle laxity in each participant was quantitatively measured by performing the arthrometric anterior drawer test. Continuous data of loading force and joint displacement were recorded. Data from both ankles were compared for the ankle joint displacement at a loading force of 75 N (D75) and load-displacement ratio from 10 to 40 N (LDR 10-40).
resultsThe D75 between injured and uninjured ankles in patients with MAI was different (t37 = 9.78, P < .001). The mean LDR 10-40 in injured ankles was higher than that in uninjured ankles (t37 = 9.80, P < .001). In the control group, no differences were found between the left and right ankles. The MAI group had larger bilateral differences than the control group (t37 range = 7.33-8.18; P < .001). When LDR 10-40 was used to diagnose MAI, the arthrometer showed sensitivity and specificity of 0.900 and 0.933, respectively, with a cutoff value of 0.0351 mm/N.
conclusionsAn ankle arthrometer can be used to quantitatively measure the difference in bilateral ankle laxity in patients with MAI. Arthrometer-measured LDR 10-40 can be used to diagnose MAI with high diagnostic accuracy.
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.