Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40575204›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

Assessing Compliance With Ottawa Foot and Ankle Rules in the Emergency Department: A Closed-Loop Quality Improvement Project.

William Wallace, Neil Limaye, Chirag Rao, Siddharth Menon, George Ratcliffe, Ahmed Mostafa, Christopher Blakeley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

William WallaceDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Croydon Health Service National Health Service (NHS) Trust, London, GBR.
Neil LimayeDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, London, GBR.
Chirag RaoDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Kingston Hospital National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, London, GBR.
Siddharth MenonSchool of Medicine, King's College London, London, GBR.
George RatcliffeDepartment of General Surgery, Lewisham and Greenwich National Health Service (NHS) Trust, London, GBR.
Ahmed MostafaDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, London, GBR.
Christopher BlakeleyDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Croydon Health Service National Health Service (NHS) Trust, London, GBR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction Traumatic foot and ankle injuries are frequent presentations to the emergency department (ED). The Ottawa Foot and Ankle (F&A) Rules are to help clinicians in decision making whether an X-ray of the foot or ankle is justified. Methods A retrospective analysis of ankle and foot X-ray requests from a South London Hospital ED was performed. Consecutive requests for both foot and ankle X-rays were assessed chronologically until n=100 for each cohort. The clinical documentation of each ED clerking and the X-ray request clinical details were then compared to the Ottawa Rules of that respective request. The presence of a midfoot or ankle fracture was recorded. Several interventions were implemented to improve compliance; this included distributing the results of the first audit cycle and a handout containing the Ottawa F&A rules to ED staff. A teaching session for ED Junior Doctors on assessing, documenting, and requesting X-rays for foot and ankle injuries was delivered within the department. An identical second retrospective audit cycle for both ankle and foot X-rays was then completed three weeks after implementation of the above interventions. Results The compliance of Ottawa Foot Rules in documenting foot injuries significantly improved from 48% to 78% (p<.001). Foot X-ray request compliance significantly improved from 32% to 54% (p<.01). Documentation compliance of ankle injuries significantly improved from 74% to 87% (p<.05). Ankle injury X-ray request compliance improved from 43% to 57% (p<.05). Fracture rate did not significantly change; ankle fractures increased from 17% to 22% (p=.372), foot fracture rate remained 15% in both cycles. Significance was assessed using the Chi-square test throughout. Conclusion This two-cycle Quality Improvement Project demonstrated significant improvement in compliance with Ottawa F&A Rules for ED clerking documentation and X-ray request clinical details in a South London Hospital. Compliance with Ottawa F&A Rules has the potential to reduce costs, facilitate faster discharge, and reduce unnecessary radiation exposure.

Indexed as

ankle injuriesankle x-rayfoot injuriesfoot x-rayottawa ankle rulesottawa foot rulesquality improvement project (qip)

Identifiers

PMID40575204
PMCPMC12200823

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.