medigraphic.com
ISSN 0301-696X (Print)
Órgano de difusión del Servicio de Sanidad Militar y del Colegio Nacional de Médicos Militares

2018, Number 3-4

<< Back Next >>

Rev Sanid Milit Mex 2018; 72 (3-4)

Grade II ankle sprain treatment in working adults: immobilization versus functional bandage

Catalán RDE, Sierra PM, Ceballos SJA, Rendón MME

Language: Spanish
References: 17
Page: 240-245
PDF size: 238.49 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Background: The grade II ankle sprain it is one of the most frequent pathologies in the musculoskeletal system and one of the principal motives of laboral inability. Despite the fact this pathology is one of the most common reasons for ER visiting there is not a standard treatment for it, and exist controversy about the immobilization vs. an early mobilization. Objective: Determine the best treatment for grade II ankle sprains, offering a satisfactory result with a minor time of labor inability. Material and methods: Single-blind randomized controlled clinical trial with two groups immobilization versus functional bandage, both groups with VAS evaluation at the beginning and at the end of treatment, same AINES management and rehabilitation, 30 days after the injury we evaluate the functional outcome with Karlsson score. Results: At the beginning all patients report pain over 70 (moderate-severe) without difference in the average of both groups (immobilization 86.3 ± 9.6 versus functional bandage treatment of 86.1 ± 8.5; p = 0.95). Both groups present less pain at the end of the treatment, the bandage group present lower values, (Immobilization average 55.2 ± 15.5 versus functional bandage treatment 40.3 ± 12.8, p ≤ 0.001). In the immobilization group 24 (88.9%) at the end of the treatment had moderate pain and 3 (11.1%) light pain against the functional treatment group where 17 (73.1%) had moderate pain and 7 (26.9%) light (p = 0.15). Conclusion: Functional bandage is an excellent treatment option for grade II ankle sprain, offering good results with a lower time of inability and cost.


REFERENCES

  1. Witjes S, Gresnigt F, van den Bekerom MP, Olsman JG, van Dijk NC. The ANKLE TRIAL (ankle treatment after injuries of the ankle ligaments): what is the benefit of external support devices in the functional treatment of acute ankle sprain? A randomised controlled trial. BMC Musculoskeletal Disord. 2012; 13: 21.

  2. Acosta AA, Campos V, Escobar A, Gomez D, Rodríguez CF, Viniegra A. Guía de práctica clínica en diagnóstico y manejo del esguince de tobillo en la fase aguda para el primer nivel de atención del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social [En Línea].

  3. Anderson R, Hunt K. (2012) Ankle sprain. American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society. 2013; Available in: http://www.aofas.org/education/orthopaedicarticles/ankle-sprain.pdf.

  4. Verma S, Hamilton K, Hawkins HH, Kothari R, Singal B, Buncher R et al. Clinical application of the Ottawa ankle rules for the use of radiography in acute ankle injuries: an independent site assessment. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997; 169 (3): 825-827.

  5. Lardenoye S, Theunissen E, Cleffken B, Brink PR, de Bie RA, Poeze M. The effect of taping versus semi-rigid bracing on patient outcome and satisfaction in ankle sprains: a prospective, randomized controlled trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2012; 13: 81.

  6. Prado MP, Mendes AA, Amodio DT, Camanho GL, Smyth NA, Fernandes TD. A comparative, prospective, and randomized study of two conservative treatment protocols for first-episode lateral ankle ligament injuries. Foot Ankle Int. 2014; 35 (3): 201-206.

  7. Bleakley CM, O’Connor S, Tully MA, Rocke LG, MacAuley DC, McDonough SM. The PRICE study (Protection Rest Ice Compression Elevation): design of a randomised controlled trial comparing standard versus cryokinetic ice applications in the management of acute ankle sprain [ISRCTN13903946]. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2007; 8 (1): 125.

  8. McGovern RP, Martin RL. Managing ankle ligament sprains and tears: current opinion. Open Access J Sports Med. 2016; 7: 33-42.

  9. Beynnon BD, Renström PA, Haugh L, Uh BS, Barker H. A prospective, randomized clinical investigation of the treatment of first-time ankle sprains. Am J Sports Med. 2006; 34 (9): 1401-1412.

  10. Naeem M, Rahimnajjad MK, Rahimnajjad NA, Idrees Z, Shah GA, Abbas G. Assessment of functional treatment versus plaster of Paris in the treatment of grade 1 and 2 lateral ankle sprains. J Orthop Traumatol. 2015; 16 (1): 41-46.

  11. Raymond J, Nicholson LL, Hiller CE, Refshauge KM. The effect of ankle taping or bracing on proprioception in functional ankle instability: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Sci Med Sport. 2012; 15 (5): 386-392.

  12. Waterman BR, Owens BD, Davey S, Zacchilli MA, Belmont PJ Jr. The epidemiology of ankle sprains in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010; 92 (13): 2279-2284.

  13. Bleakley CM, O’Connor SR, Tully MA, Rocke LG, MacAuley DC, Bradbury I et al. Effect of accelerated rehabilitation on function after ankle sprain: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2010; 340. c1964.

  14. van den Bekerom MP, Struijs PA, Blankevoort L, Welling L, Van Dijk CN, Kerkhoffs GM. What is the evidence for rest, ice, compression, and elevation therapy in the treatment of ankle sprains in adults? J Athl Train. 2012; 47 (4): 435-443.

  15. Cano LG, Cobo EP, Mesquida MP. Tratamiento funcional del esguince de tobillo. Rehabilitación. 2004; 38 (4): 182-187.

  16. Kemler E, van de Port I, Backx F, van Dijk CN. A systematic review on the treatment of acute ankle sprain. Sports Med. 2011; 41 (3): 185-197.

  17. Shah S, Thomas AC, Noone JM, Blanchette CM, Wikstrom EA. Incidence and cost of ankle sprains in United States emergency departments. Sports Health. 2016; 8 (6): 547-552.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com