Search

Background Despite being the most commonly incurred sports injury with a high recurrence rate, there are no guidelines to inform return to sport (RTS) decisions following acute lateral ankle sprain injuries. We aimed to develop a list of assessment items to address this gap. Methods We used a three-round Delphi survey approach to develop consensus of opinion among 155 globally diverse health professionals working in elite field or court sports. This involved surveys that were structured in question format with both closed-response and open-response options. We asked panellists to indicate their agreement about whether or not assessment items should support the RTS decision after an acute lateral ankle sprain injury. The second and third round surveys included quantitative and qualitative feedback from the previous round. We defined a priori consensus being reached at >70% agree or disagree responses. Results Sixteen assessment items reached consensus to be included in the RTS decision after an acute lateral ankle sprain injury. They were mapped to five domains with 98% panellist agreement - PAASS: Pain (during sport participation and over the last 24 hours), Ankle impairments (range of motion; muscle strength, endurance and power), Athlete perception (perceived ankle confidence/reassurance and stability; psychological readiness), Sensorimotor control (proprioception; dynamic postural control/balance), Sport/functional performance (hopping, jumping and agility; sport-specific drills; ability to complete a full training session). Conclusion Expert opinion indicated that pain severity, ankle impairments, sensorimotor control, athlete perception/readiness and sport/functional performance should be assessed to inform the RTS decision following an acute lateral ankle sprain injury. Trial registration number ACTRN12619000522112.

Deciding when to return to sport after injury is complex and multifactorial-an exercise in risk management. Return to sport decisions are made every day by clinicians, athletes and coaches, ideally in a collaborative way. The purpose of this consensus statement was to present and synthesise current evidence to make recommendations for return to sport decision-making, clinical practice and future research directions related to returning athletes to sport. A half day meeting was held in Bern, Switzerland, after the First World Congress in Sports Physical Therapy. 17 expert clinicians participated. 4 main sections were initially agreed upon, then participants elected to join 1 of the 4 groups-each group focused on 1 section of the consensus statement. Participants in each group discussed and summarised the key issues for their section before the 17-member group met again for discussion to reach consensus on the content of the 4 sections. Return to sport is not a decision taken in isolation at the end of the recovery and rehabilitation process. Instead, return to sport should be viewed as a continuum, paralleled with recovery and rehabilitation. Biopsychosocial models may help the clinician make sense of individual factors that may influence the athlete's return to sport, and the Strategic Assessment of Risk and Risk Tolerance framework may help decision-makers synthesise information to make an optimal return to sport decision. Research evidence to support return to sport decisions in clinical practice is scarce. Future research should focus on a standardised approach to defining, measuring and reporting return to sport outcomes, and identifying valuable prognostic factors for returning to sport.

Deciding when to return to sport after injury is complex and multifactorial-an exercise in risk management. Return to sport decisions are made every day by clinicians, athletes and coaches, ideally in a collaborative way. The purpose of this consensus statement was to present and synthesise current evidence to make recommendations for return to sport decision-making, clinical practice and future research directions related to returning athletes to sport. A half day meeting was held in Bern, Switzerland, after the First World Congress in Sports Physical Therapy. 17 expert clinicians participated. 4 main sections were initially agreed upon, then participants elected to join 1 of the 4 groups-each group focused on 1 section of the consensus statement. Participants in each group discussed and summarised the key issues for their section before the 17-member group met again for discussion to reach consensus on the content of the 4 sections. Return to sport is not a decision taken in isolation at the end of the recovery and rehabilitation process. Instead, return to sport should be viewed as a continuum, paralleled with recovery and rehabilitation. Biopsychosocial models may help the clinician make sense of individual factors that may influence the athletes return to sport, and the Strategic Assessment of Risk and Risk Tolerance framework may help decision-makers synthesise information to make an optimal return to sport decision. Research evidence to support return to sport decisions in clinical practice is scarce. Future research should focus on a standardised approach to defining, measuring and reporting return to sport outcomes, and identifying valuable prognostic factors for returning to sport.

Applying ice or other forms of topical cooling is a popular method of treating sports injuries. It is commonplace for athletes to return to competitive activity, shortly or immediately after the application of a cold treatment. In this article, we examine the effect of local tissue cooling on outcomes relating to functional performance and to discuss their relevance to the sporting environment. A computerized literature search, citation tracking and hand search was performed up to April, 2011. Eligible studies were trials involving healthy human participants, describing the effects of cooling on outcomes relating to functional performance. Two reviewers independently assessed the validity of included trials and calculated effect sizes. Thirty five trials met the inclusion criteria; all had a high risk of bias. The mean sample size was 19. Meta-analyses were not undertaken due to clinical heterogeneity. The majority of studies used cooling durations >20 minutes. Strength (peak torque/force) was reported by 25 studies with approximately 75% recording a decrease in strength immediately following cooling. There was evidence from six studies that cooling adversely affected speed, power and agility-based running tasks; two studies found this was negated with a short rewarming period. There was conflicting evidence on the effect of cooling on isolated muscular endurance. A small number of studies found that cooling decreased upper limb dexterity and accuracy. The current evidence base suggests that athletes will probably be at a performance disadvantage if they return to activity immediately after cooling. This is based on cooling for longer than 20 minutes, which may exceed the durations employed in some sporting environments. In addition, some of the reported changes were clinically small and may only be relevant in elite sport. Until better evidence is available, practitioners should use short cooling applications and/or undertake a progressive warm up prior to returnin