Skip to main content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
J Man Manip Ther. 2010 Mar; 18(1): 22–28.
doi: 10.1179/106698110X12595770849524
PMCID: PMC3103112
PMID: 21655420

Evidence-based treatment for ankle injuries: a clinical perspective

Chung-Wei Christine Lin,1 Claire E Hiller,2 and Rob A de Bie3
Author information Copyright and License information Disclaimer

Abstract

The most common ankle injuries are ankle sprain and ankle fracture. This review discusses treatments for ankle sprain (including the management of the acute sprain and chronic instability) and ankle fracture, using evidence from recent systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials. After ankle sprain, there is evidence for the use of functional support and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. There is weak evidence suggesting that the use of manual therapy may lead to positive short-term effects. Electro-physical agents do not appear to enhance outcomes and are not recommended. Exercise may reduce the occurrence of recurrent ankle sprains and may be effective in managing chronic ankle instability. After surgical fixation for ankle fracture, an early introduction of activity, administered via early weight-bearing or exercise during the immobilization period, may lead to better outcomes. However, the use of a brace or orthosis to enable exercise during the immobilization period may also lead to a higher rate of adverse events, suggesting that this treatment regimen needs to be applied judiciously. After the immobilization period, the focus of treatment for ankle fracture should be on a progressive exercise program.

Keywords: Ankle injuries, Evidence-based practice, Rehabilitation, Systematic review, Therapy

Injuries to the ankle are common. In a recent systematic review, the ankle was found to be the most common site of injury in 24 of the 70 sports studied.1 In addition, 22% of sports injuries presenting to emergency rooms were ankle injuries, among which sprain was the most common injury followed by fracture (the ratio of sprain to fracture is 8∶1).2 In the general population, the incidence of ankle sprain and fracture has been reported to be 600–7003 and 107–1874–7 per 100 000 person years, respectively.

Lateral ankle sprains account for 85% of all ankle sprains, the most common mechanism of injury being inversion of the plantar-flexed foot.8 After a sprain, persistent symptoms remain in up to 30% of individuals.9 Furthermore, a history of ankle sprain is the most common predisposing factor to the occurrence of ankle sprain.10 Similarly, after ankle fracture, symptoms such as pain, joint stiffness, and limitation in lower limb activities occur and may persist into the long term11.

Sequelae after ankle injuries highlight the importance of effective treatment for these conditions. The purpose of this paper was to conduct a narrative review of two of the most common ankle injuries: ankle sprain (including treatment for acute sprain and chronic instability) and ankle fracture.

Ankle Sprain

The management of ankle sprain is usually conservative and involves symptom management during the acute phase followed by a period of rehabilitation. The therapist is also often involved in the treatment of the main sequelae of ankle sprain: chronic ankle instability. In recent years, there have been a number of systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials of treatment of ankle sprain, which are considered here. It should be noted that all studies in the acute ankle sprain section are of a non-specific selection of ankle sprain unless stated.

Evidence-based treatment of acute ankle sprain

Functional support is preferable to immobilization for most ankle sprains. Functional support involves the use of a removable and variable immobility device and therefore often includes an exercise component in the treatment. A meta-analysis found significant differences in favor of functional support, which included brace, elastic bandage, tape, softcast, or wrap over immobilization.12 Differences in favor of functional support included a higher percentage of people returning to sports, shorter time to return to work, less persistent swelling, and greater range of motion. However, neither Kerkhoffs et al.12 nor a subsequent review13 found a difference in rate of instability, either objective or subjective, or recurrent sprain between immobilization and functional support.

In contrast to these results, a recent large pragmatic randomized controlled trial comparing immobilization for 10 days in a below-knee cast with tubular bandage, a Bledsoe boot or an AircastTM brace, found that people with the cast had better clinical benefits at three months post-injury;14 however, all differences had disappeared by 9 months. While this study appears to contradict the previous reviews and current practice, it needs to be noted that this study exclusively recruited patients with severe ankle sprain (unable to weight-bear for at least 3 days). In addition, there are a number of limitations that should mitigate decision making during practice. Outcomes were by self-reports so there was no assessor blinding. The drop-out rate was 17% before the first follow-up, and the compliance rate with the functional supports was unknown. Therefore, current practice of using functional support rather than immobilization for most ankle sprains should remain in place until follow-up of the latest trial confirms the result.

The type of functional support that is preferable to use may depend on the main outcome desired. A systematic review comparing the use of one type of functional support with another (included elastic bandage, tape, semi-rigid support, and lace-up ankle support) found them equally effective in reducing pain, swelling, ankle instability, and preventing recurrent sprain.15 A semi-rigid support appeared more effective for earlier return to sport, and tape resulted in more skin complications. A more recent comparison of an Aircast ankle brace with elastic support bandage group demonstrated a significant improvement in ankle joint function at 10 and 30 days when using the ankle brace.16

There is fairly consistent evidence that the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs during the first 2 weeks following ankle sprain, administered orally or topically, is more effective than a placebo.17,18 Only one study followed patients for a longer period;19 it reported that Piroxicam taken for 1 week significantly improved function at all time points up to 6 months compared with a placebo. However, the study also reported greater range of motion restriction and mechanical instability in the intervention group in the short term.

The extent and quality of the available evidence for the effects of electro-physical agents for treatment of acute ankle sprains are limited. Ultrasound does not appear to be effective although as the tested dosage range and treatment times are limited, there may be an effect using untested variables.17,20 The use of laser has conflicting evidence of effectiveness. In one study, low-level laser with rest, ice, compression, and elevation (RICE) was shown to reduce swelling up to 3 days after the treatment when commenced within 8 h of injury and given twice a day, compared with RICE alone, or RICE and placebo laser.21 Another study showed that neither high nor low-level laser was more effective than placebo in reducing pain.22 Furthermore, those in the placebo group had significant improvements in some outcomes compared to those who received laser, most markedly on the re-uptake of work and sports.

Manual therapy in a number of forms has been shown to have positive effects after acute23,24 and subacute ankle sprain.25,26 However, this evidence is weak (generated from small randomized controlled trials or cross-over studies) and the effects may be short-lasting (Table 1). Following acute ankle sprain, a passive anteroposterior glide of the talus was better at increasing dorsiflexion range of motion than rest, ice, compression, and elevation at the end of the treatment period.24 The addition of osteopathic ankle manipulation to standard care reduced swelling and pain at the end of the treatment session.23 These effects appeared clinically worthwhile but disappeared at the short-term (5–7 days) follow-up. During the subacute phase, both Mulligan’s mobilization with movement25 and a chiropractic mortise adjustment technique26 increased dorsiflexion range immediately following treatment in participants with Grade II and Grades I and II sprains, respectively. Manual therapy also increased ankle function up to 1 month following the treatment.26

Table 1

Effects of manual therapy after ankle sprain
StudyGroupsManual therapyFollow-up time pointsOutcomes and between-group differences* [mean (95% CI)]
Collins et al.25
  • manual therapy;
  • placebo manual therapy (manual contact only);
  • control (control stance in treatment position);
  • n  =  16;
  • cross-over trial
  • Mulligan’s mobilization (anterior–posterior glide) with movement in weight-bearing dorsiflexion with seatbelt;
  •  three sets of 10 to end of pain-free range;
  • one session for each treatment condition only.
Post-treatmentAnkle dorsiflexion ROM (degrees):
  • manual therapy versus placebo  =  6·9 (−23·7–37·4);
  • manual therapy versus control  =  12·5 (−16·3–41·3)
Eisenhart et al.23
  • manual therapy, RICE, analgesics, Jones compression (n  =  28);
  • RICE, analgesics, Jones compression (n  =  27)
 
  •  individualized osteopathic manipulative treatment for 10–20 min in supine;
  • one session only.
Post-treatment and 5–7 days laterAnkle dorsiflexion ROM (degrees):
  • post-treatment  =  16·8 (10·4–23·2);
  • 5–7 days  =  3·5 (−6·0–13·0)
Pain (visual analog scale, /10):
  • post-treatment  =  −3·15 (−4·3 to (−2·0));
  • 5–7 days  =  −0·4 (−1·8–1·1)
Green et al.24
  • manual therapy plus RICE (n  =  19);
  • RICE only (n  =  19)
  • Maitland anterior–posterior talocrural mobilization with pain-free force at pain-free limit of dorsiflexion;
  •  three sets of 60 s, up to six sessions over 2 weeks;
End of first and last treatment Ankle dorsiflexion ROM (degrees):  
  • 7·1 (1·3–12·9)
Pellow and Brantingham26
  • manual therapy (n  =  15);
  • detuned ultrasound (n  =  15)
  • chiropractic mortise separation adjustment;
  • up to eight treatments over 4 weeks.
.		End first and last treatment session, 1 monthAnkle dorsiflexion ROM (degrees):
  • last treatment  =  4·3 (0·2–8·3);
  • 1 month  =  5·2 (2·5–7·9)
Pain (numerical rating scale, %)
  • last treatment: −7·4 (−20·6–5·8);
  • 1 month: −8·5 (−19·2–2·1)
Disability (Kaikonnen scale):
  • last treatment  =  13·7 (4·5–22·8);
  • 1 month  =  14·3 (7·5–21·2)
*Note: All studies are randomized controlled trials unless otherwise stated. Only primary outcomes are reported. For studies that did not distinguish outcomes as primary or secondary, pain intensity, disability, and range of motion outcomes (if available) are reported. Timing of the outcomes is for the end of treatment period and end of follow-up (if available).

RICE  =  rest, ice, compression and elevation; ROM  =  range of motion.

Three systematic reviews of the effect of exercise compared with usual care concluded that exercise resulted in less risk of recurrent sprain27,28 (relative risk: 0.37, 95% CI  =  0.18–0.74),28 and there was limited evidence of a greater reduction in swelling and faster return to work.29 Since the publication of the systematic reviews, two randomized controlled trials have been published. Contrary to the results of previous systematic reviews, van Rijn et al.30 showed that supervised exercises (including balance, walking, and running) in addition to usual care did not reduce the rate of recurrent ankle sprain or improve subjective recovery. This finding was consistent regardless of the severity of the sprain.31 However, data reported from the study suggested a large amount of variance in the results (e.g. the relative risk of the rate of recurrent ankle sprain is 0.88 for supervised exercises at the 12 month follow-up, 95% CI  =  0.47 to 1.63),30 possibly due to the small number of resprains (29 in a total cohort of 102 participants). In a larger study (n  =  522), Hupperets et al.32 found that adding balance exercises to usual care reduced the rate of recurrent ankle sprain (relative risk: 0.63, 95% CI  =  0.45–0.88). This study and results of previous systematic reviews suggest that exercise may be beneficial in reducing the risk of recurrent sprain.

Evidence-based treatment of chronic ankle instability

Manifestations of chronic ankle instability include recurrent ankle sprains, the sensation of the ankle ‘giving way’, pain, impaired performance during functional tasks, and perceived difficulties with activities of daily living. The main interventions for chronic ankle instability are external ankle supports and exercise. The use of external ankle supports has been the subject of two systematic reviews,33,34 which concluded, with fairly strong evidence, that the use of supports during sporting activity results in a decreased risk of recurrent ankle sprain.34

A combination of factors may contribute to chronic ankle instability, including diminished neuromuscular control, proprioception and postural control deficits, muscle weakness, impaired joint position sense, and ligament laxity.8,35,36 A number of recent systematic reviews demonstrated balance and proprioceptive deficits in patients with chronic ankle instability,37–39 and exercise as well as neuromuscular and balance interventions appeared to be effective in addressing these deficits.27,39,40 However, the relationship between improving these deficits and the effect on subjective or objective instability or recurrent sprain was unclear. While programs that included balance and muscle strengthening exercises were effective in decreasing the incidence of ‘giving way’ episodes, reducing recurrent sprain and improving function in participants with chronic ankle instability28,41 the quality of the studies were low.28 A number of recent randomized controlled trials have demonstrated an improvement in balance and severity of chronic instability, but there was no long-term follow-up so the effect on recurrent sprain rate was unknown.40,42,43 Owing to the heterogeneity of the various rehabilitation programs, it is difficult to pinpoint the potentially effective components of the programs. A common clinical thought is that wobble board or disk training is the essential component, but there is no direct evidence to support this.

Ankle Fracture

The management of ankle fracture usually involves surgical or conservative fracture reduction, followed by a period of immobilization and rehabilitation.44 Rehabilitation for ankle fracture may start during the immobilization period, for example, with commencement of weight-bearing or exercise. More often, rehabilitation for ankle fracture starts after the immobilization period. Recently, there has been one systematic review45 and one Cochrane review46 on treatments for rehabilitation after ankle fracture.

Evidence-based treatment for ankle fracture during the immobilization period

Most of the randomized controlled trials examining treatment for ankle fracture during the immobilization period included only subjects who had had surgical rather than conservative orthopedic management.46 There is some evidence that an early introduction of activity during this period may be beneficial for people after surgical fixation.45,46 For example, the use of a removable type of immobilization (e.g. orthosis and brace) so that gentle ankle exercise is possible improved function, pain, and ankle range of motion; allowing early weight-bearing during the immobilization period also improved ankle range of motion. However, the use of a removable type of immobilization combined with early exercise may also lead to a higher rate of adverse events. These adverse events were generally minor (e.g. changes in skin sensation), but there were a few cases where revision surgery was required. The higher rate of adverse events indicates that this treatment needs to be applied judiciously in clinical practice, for example, only in patients who are able to comply with the regimen. The use of a compression stocking in addition to a cast, or electro-physical agents (ultrasound, electrical muscle stimulation or interferential) during the immobilization period did not improve outcomes after surgical fixation.46

Since the publication of these reviews, one additional randomized controlled trial has been published; it investigated the effects of an orthosis that allowed some ankle movement after surgical fixation.47 The results were comparable to previous studies on removable immobilization combined with ankle exercise, that is, there was an improvement in function and ankle range of motion when this treatment was compared to cast immobilization. However, one case of impaired wound healing required surgical revision in the treatment group.

Evidence-based treatment for ankle fracture after the immobilization period

Treatments prescribed for ankle fracture after the immobilization period typically include exercise, manual therapy, progression of mobility, and a gradual increase in activities.48 The Cochrane review identified two randomized controlled trials that examined the effectiveness of stretching or manual therapy.46 Adding stretching exercises to a general exercise program did not improve outcomes after ankle fracture.49 A small study (n  =  10) provided some preliminary results on manual therapy; when applied in addition to exercises, manual therapy (Kaltenborn-based) did not improve function but did increase dorsiflexion range of motion compared to exercise alone50 (mean  =  4.2°, 95% CI  =  0.9–7.5, Table 2).

Table 2

Effects of manual therapy after ankle fracture from randomized controlled trials
StudyComparisonManual therapyFollow-up time pointsOutcomes and between-group differences* [mean (95% CI)]
Lin et al.51Manual therapy plus exercise (n  =  47) versus exercise only (n  =  47)
  • large amplitude (grade III) anterior–posterior glides of the talus in supine or long sitting;
  • 3–5 sets of 60 s, two times a week for 4 weeks
4, 12, and 24 weeksDisability (lower extremity functional scale, /80):
  • 4 weeks: −0.3 (−5.1–4.5);
  • 24 weeks: −1.0 (−5.9–3.9)
Health-related quality of life (assessment of quality of life):
  • 4 weeks: 0.9 (−0.5–2.3);
  • 24 weeks: 1.3 (0.1–2.5)
Wilson50Manual therapy plus exercise (n  =  5) versus exercise only (n  =  5)
  • Kaltenborn-based manual therapy (including traction and gliding mobilization) to the talocrural and talocalcaneal joints, and other hypomobile lower limb joints;
  • three times a week for 5 weeks
5 weeksDisability (modified Olerud–Molander ankle score, /100):
  • 21 (−1.4–43.40)
Ankle dorsiflexion ROM (degrees):
  • 4.2 (0.9–7.5)
Ankle plantarflexion ROM (degrees):
  • −7.4 (−16.34–1.54)
*Note: Only primary outcomes are reported. For studies that did not distinguish outcomes as primary or secondary, pain intensity, disability, and range of motion outcomes (if available) are reported. Timing of the outcomes is for the end of treatment period and end of follow-up (if available).

ROM  =  range of motion.

We further investigated the effectiveness of manual therapy (large amplitude anterior–posterior glides of the talus) in a randomized controlled trial of 94 participants.51 There were no clinically worthwhile differences between the treatment (manual therapy plus exercise) and control (exercise only) groups in all outcomes, including function and ankle range of motion (Table 2). These findings were consistent regardless of the severity of fracture. Furthermore, although the overall costs did not differ between groups, participants in the treatment group incurred more out-of-pocket costs. Our findings may only apply to the specific manual therapy technique used; however, there is some evidence in recurrent ankle sprain showing that different techniques do not lead to a difference in outcomes.52

Thus, current evidence on treatments for ankle fracture after the immobilization shows that the addition of stretching or manual therapy to exercises did not enhance outcomes. This suggests that treatment for ankle fracture after the immobilization should be focused on a progressive and structured exercise program.

Prognostic factors

Studies on factors that can predict or influence outcome in ankle fracture may assist clinicians in allocating treatment resources and advising patients according to the expected prognosis. Factors found to be associated with outcomes after ankle fracture include the type of orthopedic management (surgical or conservative),11,53–57 fracture severity,11,54,58–64 ankle range of motion,54,65 and pain65. While ankle fracture managed surgically achieves better anatomical reduction than conservative means,53,55,56 the implication of this on clinical outcomes is unclear with some authors finding no difference between surgical or conservative management,11,53,56 some favoring surgical management,55 and others favoring conservative management.54,57 Similarly, it is not clear whether the severity of ankle fracture, classified using the Weber system,44 predicts outcomes, due to conflicting findings in the literature.11,58,60–64 Methodological flaws, such as retrospective data collection and significant losses of subjects to follow-up, may have contributed to the conflicting results.

Classifying fracture severity according to the number of malleoli fractured appears to provide a more reliable prediction of outcome. Unimalleolar fracture has been consistently shown to be associated with better outcomes than bimalleolar or trimalleolar fracture.54,58,60,62 There is also some indication that baseline ankle dorsiflexion range of motion and pain are independent predictors of function, perceived recovery, and dorsiflexion range of motion in the short and medium term.54,65 However, further research is required to investigate whether modifying these factors, or selectively providing patients with significant problems in dorsiflexion range of motion and pain with a more intensive rehabilitation program, will lead to better outcomes.

Conclusion

Evidence-based treatment of acute ankle sprain should consist of functional support, possibly augmented by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the early phases after injury. Manual therapy may also provide very short-term benefits after ankle sprain. Recent studies showed the additional benefits of exercise, particularly balance exercises, in reducing the risk of a recurrent sprain. The use of electro-physical agents does not appear to enhance, and may even negate, outcomes. In the case of chronic ankle instability, balance and strengthening exercises may be advantageous in reducing ‘giving way’ episodes and improving function. After ankle fracture, current evidence supports an early introduction of activity to enhance outcomes. This can be administered via the commencement of exercise or weight-bearing during the immobilization period in patients who will comply with this treatment regimen. After the immobilization period, adding adjunct treatments to a comprehensive exercise program may not improve outcome, and hence the focus of the treatment should be on exercise.

Acknowledgments

CL is funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia. CH is funded by a Faculty of Health Sciences Post-doctoral Fellowship, University of Sydney, Australia.

References

1. Fong DT, Hong Y, Chan LK, Yung PS, Chan KM. A systematic review on ankle injury and ankle sprain in sports. Sports Med 2007;37: 73–94 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
2. Boyce SH, Quigley MA. Review of sports injuries presenting to an accident and emergency department. Emerg Med J 2004;21: 704–6 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
3. Bridgman SA, Clement D, Downing A, Walley G, Phair I, Maffulli N. Population-based epidemiology of ankle sprains attending accident and emergency units in the West Midlands of England, and a survey of UK practice for severe ankle sprains. Emerg Med J 2003;20: 508–10 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
4. Bengner U, Johnell O, Redlund-Johnell I. Epidemiology of ankle fracture 1950 and 1980: increasing incidence in elderly women. Acta Orthop Scand 1986;57: 35–7 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
5. Court-Brown CM, McBirnie J, Wilson G. Adult ankle fractures: an increasing problem? Acta Orthop Scand 1998;69: 43–7 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
6. Daly PJ, Fitzgerald RH, Jr, Melton LJ, Ilstrup DM. Epidemiology of ankle fractures in Rochester, Minnesota. Acta Orthop Scand 1987;58: 539–44 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
7. Jensen SL, Andresen BK, Mencke S, Nielsen PT. Epidemiology of ankle fractures: a prospective population-based study of 212 cases in Aalborg, Denmark. Acta Orthop Scand 1998;69: 48–50 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
8. Hertel J. Functional anatomy, pathomechanics, and pathophysiology of lateral ankle instability. J Athl Train 2002;37: 364–75 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
9. van Rijn RM, van Os AG, Bernsen RM, Luijsterburg PA, Koes BW, Bierma-Zeinstra SM. What is the clinical course of acute ankle sprains? A systematic literature review. Am J Med 2008;121: 324–31, e326 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
10. Hiller CE, Refshauge KM, Herbert RD, Kilbreath SL. Intrinsic predictors of lateral ankle sprain in adolescent dancers: a prospective cohort study. Clin J Sport Med 2008;18: 44–8 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
11. Lash N, Horne G, Fielden J, Devane P. Ankle fractures: functional and lifestyle outcomes at 2 years. ANZ J Surg 2002;72: 724–30 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
12. Kerkhoffs GM, Rowe BH, Assendelft WJ, Kelly KD, Struijs PA, van Dijk CN. Immobilisation and functional treatment for acute lateral ankle ligament injuries in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2002;3: CD003762. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
13. Jones MH, Amendola AS, Jones MH, Amendola AS. Acute treatment of inversion ankle sprains: immobilization versus functional treatment. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2007;455: 169–72 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
14. Lamb SE, Marsh JL, Hutton JL, Nakash R, Cooke MW, Collaborative Ankle Support Trial (CAST Group) Mechanical supports for acute, severe ankle sprain: a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2009;373: 575–81 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
15. Kerkhoffs GM, Struijs PA, Marti RK, Assendelft WJ, Blankevoort L, van Dijk CN. Different functional treatment strategies for acute lateral ankle ligament injuries in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2002;3: CD002938. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
16. Boyce SH, Quigley MA, Campbell S. Management of ankle sprains: a randomised controlled trial of the treatment of inversion injuries using an elastic support bandage or an Aircast ankle brace. Br J Sports Med 2005;39: 91–6 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
17. Bleakley CM, McDonough SM, MacAuley DC, Bleakley CM, McDonough SM, MacAuley DC. Some conservative strategies are effective when added to controlled mobilisation with external support after acute ankle sprain: a systematic review. Aust J Physiother 2008;54: 7–20 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
18. Ogilvie-Harris DJ, Gilbart M. Treatment modalities for soft tissue injuries of the ankle: a critical review. Clin J Sport Med 1995;5: 175–86 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
19. Slatyer MA, Hensley MJ, Lopert R. A randomized controlled trial of piroxicam in the management of acute ankle sprain in Australian Regular Army recruits: the Kapooka Ankle Sprain Study. Am J Sports Med 1997;25: 544–53 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
20. van der Windt DA, van der Heijden GJ, van den Berg S, ter Riet G, de Winter AF, Bouter LM. Ultrasound therapy for acute ankle sprains. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2002;1: CD001250. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
21. Stergioulas A. Low-level laser treatment can reduce edema in second-degree ankle sprains. J Clin Laser Med Surg 2004;22: 125–8 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
22. de Bie RA, de Vet HC, Lenssen TF, van den Wildenberg FA, Kootstra G, Knipschild PG. Low-level laser therapy in ankle sprains: a randomized clinical trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1998;79: 1415–20 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
23. Eisenhart AW, Gaeta TJ, Yens DP. Osteopathic manipulative treatment in the emergency department for patients with acute ankle injuries. J Am Osteopath Assoc 2003;103: 417–21 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
24. Green T, Refshauge K, Crosbie J, Adams R. A randomized controlled trial of a passive accessory joint mobilization on acute ankle inversion sprains. Phys Ther 2001;81: 984–94 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
25. Collins N, Teys P, Vicenzino B. The initial effects of a Mulligan’s mobilization with movement technique on dorsiflexion and pain in subacute ankle sprains. Man Ther 2004;9: 77–82 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
26. Pellow JE, Brantingham JW. The efficacy of adjusting the ankle in the treatment of subacute and chronic grade I and grade II ankle inversion sprains. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2001;24: 17–24 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
27. McKeon PO, Hertel J. Systematic review of postural control and lateral ankle instability, part II: is balance training clinically effective? J Athl Train 2008;43: 305–15 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
28. van der Wees PJ, Lenssen AF, Hendriks EJ, Stomp DJ, Dekker J, de Bie RA. Effectiveness of exercise therapy and manual mobilisation in ankle sprain and functional instability: a systematic review. Aust J Physiother 2006;52: 27–37 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
29. van Os AG, Bierma-Zeinstra SM, Verhagen A, de Bie R, Luijsterburg PA, Koes BW. Comparison of conventional treatment and supervised rehabilitation for treatment of acute lateral ankle sprains: a systematic review of the literature. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2005;35: 95–105 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
30. van Rijn RM, van Os AG, Kleinrensink GJ, Bernsen RM, Verhaar JA, Koes BW, et al. Supervised exercises for adults with acute lateral ankle sprain: a randomised controlled trial. Br J Gen Pract 2007;57: 793–800 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
31. van Rijn RM, van Heest JA, van der Wees P, Koes BW, Bierma-Zeinstra SM. Some benefit from physiotherapy intervention in the subgroup of patients with severe ankle sprain as determined by the ankle function score: a randomized trial. Aust J Physiother 2009;55: 107–13 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
32. Hupperets MD, Verhagen EA, van Mechelen W. Effect of unsupervised home-based proprioceptive training on recurrences of ankle sprain: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2009;339: b2684. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
33. Aaltonen S, Karjalainen H, Heinonen A, Parkkari J, Kujala UM. Prevention of sports injuries: systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Arch Intern Med 2007;167: 1585–92 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
34. Handoll HHG, Rowe BH, Quinn KM, de Bie R. Interventions for preventing ankle ligament injuries. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2001;3: CD000018. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
35. Hertel J. Sensorimotor deficits with ankle sprains and chronic ankle instability. Clin Sports Med 2008;27: 353–70 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
36. Holmes A, Delahunt E. Treatment of common deficits associated with chronic ankle instability. Sports Med 2009;39: 207–24 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
37. Arnold BL, de la Motte S, Linens S, Ross SE. Ankle instability is associated with balance impairments: a meta-analysis. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2009;41: 1048–62 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
38. Munn J, Sullivan SJ, Schneiders AG. Evidence of sensorimotor deficits in functional ankle instability: A systematic review with meta-analysis. J Sci Med Sport. 2009. May 11 [Epub ahead of print] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
39. Wikstrom EA, Naik S, Lodha N, Cauraugh JH. Balance capabilities after lateral ankle trauma and intervention: a meta-analysis. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2009;41: 1287–95 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
40. McKeon PO, Ingersoll CD, Kerrigan DC, Saliba E, Bennett BC, Hertel J. Balance training improves function and postural control in those with chronic ankle instability. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2008;40: 1810–9 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
41. Loudon JK, Santos MJ, Franks L, Liu W. The effectiveness of active exercise as an intervention for functional ankle instability: a systematic review. Sports Med 2008;38: 553–63 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
42. Hale SA, Hertel J, Olmsted-Kramer LC, Hale SA, Hertel J, Olmsted-Kramer LC. The effect of a 4-week comprehensive rehabilitation program on postural control and lower extremity function in individuals with chronic ankle instability. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2007;37: 303–11 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
43. Lee AJ, Lin WH, Lee AJ, Lin WH. Twelve-week biomechanical ankle platform system training on postural stability and ankle proprioception in subjects with unilateral functional ankle instability. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2008;23: 1065–72 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
44. Solomon L, Warwick D, Nayagam S. Apley’s concise system of orthopaedics and fractures. 3rd ed London: Hodder Arnold; 2005 [Google Scholar]
45. Smith TO, Davies L. Do exercises improve outcome following ankle fracture? A systematic review. Int J Ther Rehabil 2006;13: 273–81 [Google Scholar]
46. Lin CW, Moseley AM, Refshauge KM. Rehabilitation for ankle fractures in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008;3: CD005595. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
47. Franke J, Goldhahn S, Audige L, Kohler H, Wentzensen A. The dynamic vacuum orthosis: a functional and economic benefit? Int Orthop 2008;32: 153–8 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
48. Ferkel R, Donatelli R, Hall W. Open reduction and internal fixation of the ankle. Maxey L, Magnusson J, (eds.) Rehabilitation for the postsurgical orthopedic patient. St Louis, MO: Mosby; 2001. pp. 302–313 [Google Scholar]
49. Moseley AM, Herbert RD, Nightingale EJ, Taylor DA, Evans TM, Robertson GJ, et al. Passive stretching does not enhance outcomes in patients with plantarflexion contracture after cast immobilization for ankle fracture: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005;86: 1118–26 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
50. Wilson F. Manual therapy versus traditional exercises in mobilisation of the ankle post-ankle fracture: a pilot study. NZ J Physiother 1991;19: 11–6 [Google Scholar]
51. Lin CC, Moseley AM, Haas M, Refshauge KM, Herbert RD. Manual therapy in addition to physiotherapy does not improve clinical or economic outcomes after ankle fracture. J Rehabil Med 2008;40: 433–9 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
52. Vicenzino B, Branjerdporn M, Teys P, Jordan K. Initial changes in posterior talar glide and dorsiflexion of the ankle after mobilization with movement in individuals with recurrent ankle sprain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2006;36: 464–71 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
53. Bauer M, Bergstrom B, Hemborg A, Sandegard J. Malleolar fractures: nonoperative versus operative treatment. A controlled study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1985;199: 17–27 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
54. Hancock MJ, Herbert RD, Stewart M. Prediction of outcome after ankle fracture. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2005;35: 786–92 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
55. Makwana NK, Bhowal B, Harper WM, Hui AW. Conservative versus operative treatment for displaced ankle fractures in patients over 55 years of age: a prospective, randomised study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2001;83: 525–9 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
56. Phillips WA, Schwartz HS, Keller CS, Woodward HR, Rudd WS, Spiegel PG, et al. A prospective, randomized study of the management of severe ankle fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1985;67: 67–78 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
57. Rowley DI, Norris SH, Duckworth T. A prospective trial comparing operative and manipulative treatment of ankle fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1986;68: 610–3 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
58. Becker HP, Rosenbaum D, Kriese T, Gerngross H, Claes L. Gait asymmetry following successful surgical treatment of ankle fractures in young adults. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1995;311: 262–9 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
59. Beris AE, Kabbani KT, Xenakis TA, Mitsionis G, Soucacos PK, Soucacos PN. Surgical treatment of malleolar fractures: a review of 144 patients. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1997;341: 90–8 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
60. Broos PL, Bisschop AP. Operative treatment of ankle fractures in adults: correlation between types of fracture and final results. Injury 1991;22: 403–6 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
61. Egol KA, Tejwani NC, Walsh MG, Capla EL, Koval KJ. Predictors of short-term functional outcome following ankle fracture surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006;88: 974–9 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
62. Kennedy JG, Johnson SM, Collins AL, DalloVedova P, McManus WF, Hynes DM, et al. An evaluation of the Weber classification of ankle fractures. Injury 1998;29: 577–80 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
63. Lindsjo U. Operative treatment of ankle fracture-dislocations: a follow-up study of 306/321 consecutive cases. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1985;199: 28–38 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
64. Shah NH, Sundaram RO, Velusamy A, Braithwaite IJ. Five-year functional outcome analysis of ankle fracture fixation. Injury 2007;38: 1308–12 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
65. Lin CW, Moseley AM, Herbert RD, Refshauge KM. Pain and dorsiflexion range of motion predict short- and medium-term activity limitation in people receiving physiotherapy intervention after ankle fracture: an observational study. Aust J Physiother 2009;55: 31–37 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Articles from The Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy are provided here courtesy of Taylor & Francis