ChiroACCESS Clinical Review



High Ankle Sprain: Diagnosis

This information is provided to you for use in conjunction with your clinical judgment and the specific needs of the patient.

Lead Author(s): 

Dwain M. Daniel, D.C.

  

How this evidence was rated:

Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy (SORT)



Published on

May 10, 2008

Text Size:     
The paucity of material on high ankle sprains (HAS) is reflected in the lack significant data relating to diagnostic testing. Only a handful of clinical tests were located that are used in HAS and none of the studies provide sensitivity or specificity information. The primary concern to the physician is to rule out fracture, which is relatively common and frank diastasis of the syndesmosis.

Diagnosis can be a difficult task. Although the HAS is a more serious injury than a lateral ankle sprain, there is usually a rapid resolution of swelling and ecchymosis in HAS and the patient is able to walk pain-free within days and sometimes immediately which can lead to underestimating the injury. One distinguishing feature, especially in athletes, is pain with cutting, twisting, turning, jumping or pushing off (1).

For the purpose of this monograph only sprains without frank diastasis will be discussed.

AttentionIn order to view the full content of this review, which includes information broken down by topic, you must be a registered user of ChiroACCESS. The primary mission of ChiroACCESS is to disseminate accurate user-friendly information to practicing chiropractors, faculty and students of chiropractic in order to ensure the best possible patient care.

Please click on the following link in order to register at ChiroACCESS and view the full detail of this clinical review.

If you already have an account, you may log in at this time.



References

1. 

Stiell IG, Greenberg GH, McKnight RD, Nair RC, McDowell I, Worthington JR. A study to develop clinical decision rules for the use of radiography in acute ankle injuries. Ann Emerg Med 1992; 21(4):384-390.



2. 

Yazdani S, Jahandideh H, Ghofrani H. Validation of the Ottawa Ankle Rules in Iran: a prospective survey. BMC Emerg Med 2006; 6:3.



3. 

Derksen RJ, Bakker FC, Geervliet PC, de Lange-de Klerk ES, Heilbron EA, Veenings B et al. Diagnostic accuracy and reproducibility in the interpretation of Ottawa ankle and foot rules by specialized emergency nurses. Am J Emerg Med 2005; 23(6):725-729.



4. 

Leisey J. Prospective validation of the Ottawa Ankle Rules in a deployed military population. Mil Med 2004; 169(10):804-806.



5. 

Fiesseler F, Szucs P, Kec R, Richman PB. Can nurses appropriately interpret the Ottawa Ankle Rule? Am J Emerg Med 2004; 22(3):145-148.



6. 

Papacostas E, Malliaropoulos N, Papadopoulos A, Liouliakis C. Validation of Ottawa ankle rules protocol in Greek athletes: study in the emergency departments of a district general hospital and a sports injuries clinic. Br J Sports Med 2001; 35(6):445-447.



7. 

Bachmann LM, Kolb E, Koller MT, Steurer J, ter Riet G. Accuracy of Ottawa ankle rules to exclude fractures of the ankle and mid-foot: systematic review. BMJ 2003; 326(7386):417.



8. 

Stiell IG, McKnight RD, Greenberg GH, McDowell I, Nair RC, Wells GA et al. Implementation of the Ottawa ankle rules. JAMA 1994; 271(11):827-832.



9. 

Hatch RL. Differentiating foot fractures from ankle sprains. Am Fam Physician 2003; 67(7):1438.



10. 

Birrer RB, Fani-Salek MH, Totten VY, Herman LM, Politi V. Managing ankle injuries in the emergency department. J Emerg Med 1999; 17(4):651-660.



11. 

Dissmann PD, Han KH. The tuning fork test--a useful tool for improving specificity in "Ottawa positive" patients after ankle inversion injury. Emerg Med J 2006; 23(10):788-790.



12. 

Beumer A, Swierstra BA, Mulder PG. Clinical diagnosis of syndesmotic ankle instability: evaluation of stress tests behind the curtains. Acta Orthop Scand 2002; 73(6):667-669.



13. 

Amendola A, Williams G, Foster D. Evidence-based approach to treatment of acute traumatic syndesmosis (high ankle) sprains. Sports Med Arthrosc 2006; 14(4):232-236.



14. 

Williams GN, Jones MH, Amendola A. Syndesmotic ankle sprains in athletes. Am J Sports Med 2007; 35(7):1197-1207.



15. 

Kiter E, Bozkurt M. The crossed-leg test for examination of ankle syndesmosis injuries. Foot Ankle Int 2005; 26(2):187-188.



16. 

Alonso A, Khoury L, Adams R. Clinical tests for ankle syndesmosis injury: reliability and prediction of return to function. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1998; 27(4):276-284.



17. 

Takao M, Ochi M, Oae K, Naito K, Uchio Y. Diagnosis of a tear of the tibiofibular syndesmosis. The role of arthroscopy of the ankle. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2003; 85(3):324-329.



18. 

Oae K, Takao M, Naito K, Uchio Y, Kono T, Ishida J et al. Injury of the tibiofibular syndesmosis: value of MR imaging for diagnosis. Radiology 2003; 227(1):155-161.



19. 

Han SH, Lee JW, Kim S, Suh JS, Choi YR. Chronic tibiofibular syndesmosis injury: the diagnostic efficiency of magnetic resonance imaging and comparative analysis of operative treatment. Foot Ankle Int 2007; 28(3):336-342.



20. 

Brown KW, Morrison WB, Schweitzer ME, Parellada JA, Nothnagel H. MRI findings associated with distal tibiofibular syndesmosis injury. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 182(1):131-136.



21. 

Zalavras C, Thordarson D. Ankle syndesmotic injury. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2007; 15(6):330-339.



22. 

Pneumaticos SG, Noble PC, Chatziioannou SN, Trevino SG. The effects of rotation on radiographic evaluation of the tibiofibular syndesmosis. Foot Ankle Int 2002; 23(2):107-111.



23. 

Milz P, Milz S, Steinborn M, Mittlmeier T, Putz R, Reiser M. Lateral ankle ligaments and tibiofibular syndesmosis. 13-MHz high-frequency sonography and MRI compared in 20 patients. Acta Orthop Scand 1998; 69(1):51-55.