Validity of five foot and ankle specific electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) instruments in patients undergoing elective orthopedic foot or ankle surgery

BackgroundPatient-reported outcomes (PROs) are widely accepted measures for evaluating outcomes of surgical interventions. As patient-reported information is stored in electronic health records, it is essential that there are valid electronic PRO (ePRO) instruments available for clinicians and researchers. The aim of this study was to evaluate the validity of electronic versions of five widely used foot and ankle specific PRO instruments.MethodsAltogether 111 consecutive elective foot/ankle surgery patients were invited face-to-face to participate in this study. Patients completed electronic versions of the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM), the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS), the modified Lower Extremity Function Scale (LEFS), the Manchester–Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ), and the Visual Analogue Scale Foot and Ankle (VAS-FA) on the day of elective foot and/or ankle surgery. Construct validity, coverage, and targeting of the scales were assessed.ResultsBased on general and predefined thresholds, construct validity, coverage, and targeting of the ePRO versions of the FAAM, the FAOS, the MOXFQ, and the VAS-FA were acceptable. Major issues arose with score distribution and convergent validity of the modified LEFS instrument.ConclusionsThe ePRO versions of the FAAM, the FAOS, the MOXFQ, and the VAS-FA provide valid scores for foot and ankle patients. However, our findings do not support the use of the modified LEFS as an electronic outcome measure for patients with orthopedic foot and/or ankle pathologies.     

Functional outcomes of traumatic midfoot injuries

IntroductionMidfoot injuries are rare injuries, often the result of high-energy trauma and occurring in the context of multiple trauma. This study aimed to evaluate functional outcomes and health-related quality of life after open reduction and internal fixation for midfoot injuries at a level 1 trauma center treating complex foot injuries.MethodsRetrospective single level 1 center study with follow-up by questionnaire. All adult patients who underwent open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for Lisfranc and/or Chopart injuries between 2000 and 2016 were included and invited to complete the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Midfoot Score, the EuroQOL Visual Analog Scale (EQ-VAS), and the EuroQOL five-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L). Chart reviews were performed to collect demographic, injury, and treatment characteristics.ResultsForty patients with 45 midfoot injuries were included. Follow-up was available for 29 patients (31 feet), leading to a response rate of 83%. The majority of patients suffered high-energy trauma and nearly all patients had a concomitant injury. Secondary arthrodesis was performed in 7/45 injuries. Median AOFAS score was 64 (IQR 47–78). Higher injury severity score (ISS) was associated with poorer functionality as measured with the AOFAS Midfoot Score (p = 0.046), concomitant injuries were associated with lower quality of life (p = 0.01). EQ-5D scores were significantly lower when compared to the Dutch reference population (p< 0.001).ConclusionsInjuries of the midfoot have negative effects on mid- to long-term quality of life after trauma, with considerable potential for long-term impaired functionality. When counseling patients with these rare injuries after high-energy trauma mechanisms or in the context of multiple trauma, realistic expectations on postoperative recovery should be given.     

Treatment of primarily ligamentous Lisfranc joint injuries: primary arthrodesis compared with open reduction and internal fixation. A prospective, randomized study

BACKGROUND: Open reduction and internal fixation is currently the accepted treatment for displaced Lisfranc joint injuries. However, even with anatomic reduction and stable internal fixation, treatment of these injuries does not have uniformly excellent outcomes. The objective of this study was to compare primary arthrodesis with open reduction and internal fixation for the treatment of primarily ligamentous Lisfranc joint injuries. METHODS: Forty-one patients with an isolated acute or subacute primarily ligamentous Lisfranc joint injury were enrolled in a prospective, randomized clinical trial comparing primary arthrodesis with traditional open reduction and internal fixation. The patients were followed for an average of 42.5 months. Evaluation was performed with clinical examination, radiography, the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Midfoot Scale, a visual analog pain scale, and a clinical questionnaire. RESULTS: Twenty patients were treated with open reduction and screw fixation, and twenty-one patients were treated with primary arthrodesis of the medial two or three rays. Anatomic initial reduction was obtained in eighteen of the twenty patients in the open-reduction group and twenty of the twenty-one in the arthrodesis group. At two years postoperatively, the mean AOFAS Midfoot score was 68.6 points in the open-reduction group and 88 points in the arthrodesis group (p < 0.005). Five patients in the open-reduction group had persistent pain with the development of deformity or osteoarthrosis, and they were eventually treated with arthrodesis. The patients who had been treated with a primary arthrodesis estimated that their postoperative level of activities was 92% of their preinjury level, whereas the open-reduction group estimated that their postoperative level was only 65% of their preoperative level (p < 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: A primary stable arthrodesis of the medial two or three rays appears to have a better short and medium-term outcome than open reduction and internal fixation of ligamentous Lisfranc joint injuries.     

Outcome after nonoperative treatment of stable Lisfranc injuries. A prospective cohort study

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome after nondisplaced and stable Lisfranc injuries.Methods26 patients with injuries to the Lisfranc joint complex detected on CT scans, but without displacement were tested to be stable using a fluoroscopic stress test. The patients were immobilized in a non-weightbearing short leg cast for 6 weeks. The final follow-up was 55 (IQR 53–60) months after injury.ResultsAll the Lisfranc injuries were confirmed to be stable on follow-up weightbearing radiographs at a minimum of 3 months after injury. Median American Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) midfoot score at 1-year follow-up was 89 (IQR 84–97) and at final follow-up 100 (IQR 90–100); The AOFAS score continued to improve after 1-year (P=.005). The median visual analog scale (VAS) for pain was 0 (IQR 0–0) at the final follow-up. One patient had radiological signs of osteoarthritis at 1-year follow-up.ConclusionStable Lisfranc injuries treated nonoperatively had an excellent outcome in this study with a median follow-up of 55 months. The AOFAS score continued to improve after 1 year.     

Percutaneous reduction and fixation of low energy Lisfranc injuries results in better outcome compared to open reduction and internal fixation: Results from a matched case-control study with minimum 12 months follow up

Background: Percutaneous fixation of Lisfranc injuries is potentially less invasive to traditional open techniques but evidence of any clinical benefit is lacking. The aim of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes of percutaneous reduction and internal fixation (PRIF) of low energy Lisfranc injuries with a matched, control group of patients treated with ORIF.Methods: Over a seven-year period (2012-2019), 16 consecutive patients with a low energy Lisfranc injury (Myerson B2-type) were treated with PRIF. Patient demographics, injury mechanism and radiological outcomes were recorded within a prospectively maintained database at the institution. This study sample was matched for age, sex and mechanism of injury to a control group of 16 patients with similar low energy Lisfranc injuries (Myerson B2-type) treated with ORIF. Clinical outcome was compared using the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) midfoot score and Manchester Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ).Results: At a mean follow up of 43 months (95% CI 35.6 – 50.4), both the AOFAS and MOXFQ scores were significantly higher in the PRIF group compared to the control ORIF group (AOFAS 89.1vs 76.4, p=0.03; MOXFQ 10.0 vs 27.6, p=0.03). There were no immediate postoperative complications in either group. There was no radiological evidence of midfoot osteoarthritis in the PRIF group, three patients in the ORIF group developed midfoot osteoarthritis (p=0.2).Conclusions: PRIF of low energy Lisfranc injures is a safe, minimally invasive technique and is associated with better mid-term clinical outcomes compared to ORIF.     

微型钛板跨关节固定结合埋头钉治疗Lisfranc损伤

目的 观察应用微型钛板结合埋头钉治疗Lisfranc损伤的临床疗效。 方法 回顾性分析我院自2016年8月至2018年7月收治的13例Lisfranc损伤患者资料。其中男9例,女4例,年龄35-69岁,平均49.2岁,受伤至手术时间为6-22天,平均为11.5天,所有患者经术前准备完善,局部软组织条件改善后行切开复位内固定术。采用美国足踝外科协会(AOFAS)中足功能评分及视觉模拟评分法(VAS)评估治疗效果,同时观察并发症情况。结果 所有患者获得随访,随访时间13个月到37个月,平均19.8个月。X线片显示术后3个月骨折端愈合,未出现再次脱位。末次随访时AOFAS评分为86.5±6.1,VAS评分为2.0±1.4,有1例患者出现伤口感染,1例患者取出内固定时发现有螺钉断裂。结论 微型钛板结合埋头钉治疗Lisfranc损伤固定效果可靠,有利于解剖复位,临床疗效满意。     

伴第2跖骨基底部粉碎的Lisfranc损伤的手术治疗

目的 :探讨切开复位内固定治疗伴第2跖骨基底部粉碎的Lisfranc损伤的临床疗效。方法:选取2007年3月至2012年6月伴第2跖骨基底部粉碎的Lisfranc损伤患者7例,男5例,女2例;年龄22~51岁,平均42岁;扭伤4例,交通伤3例。Myerson分型:A型1足,B型3足,C型3足。在手术内固定同时,用克氏针从内侧楔骨至第2跖骨基底部固定Lisfranc韧带。术后采用美国足踝外科协会(AOFAS)足评分标准进行功能评估;术前、术后摄X线正位、侧位、斜位片及CT检查,进行影像学评估。结果:所有患者获得随访,时间12~20个月,平均16.8个月。末次随访AOFAS评分(86.1±5.5)分;优3例,良3例,一般1例。所有切口Ⅰ期愈合,未见皮肤坏死,感染,克氏针松动、断裂等并发症。结论:在手术内固定同时,用克氏针固定伴第2跖骨基底部粉碎的Lisfranc韧带损伤,有良好的临床疗效,可避免行关节融合术。     

Comparison of the Manchester–Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ) and the Self-Reported Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (SEFAS) in patients with foot or ankle surgery

BackgroundPatient-reported outcome measures are a critical tool in evaluating the efficacy of orthopedic procedures. The intention of this study was to compare the psychometric properties of the Manchester–Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ) and the Self-Reported Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (SEFAS) in patients with foot or ankle surgery.Methods177 patients completed both scores and FAOS, Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS), Short Form 36 (SF-36) and numeric scales for pain and disability (NRS) before and after surgery. Test-Retest reliability, internal consistency, floor and ceiling effects, construct validity, responsiveness and minimal important change were analyzed.ResultsThe MOXFQ and SEFAS demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability with interclass correlation coefficient values >0.9 Cronbach’s alpha (α) values demonstrated strong internal consistency. No floor or ceiling effects were observed for both questionnaires. As hypothesized MOXFQ subscales correlated strongly with corresponding SEFAS, FAOS and SF-36 domains. MOXFQ subscales showed excellent responsiveness between preoperative assessment and postoperative follow-up, whereas SEFAS demonstrated moderate responsiveness.ConclusionsThe MOXFQ and SEFAS demonstrated good psychometric properties and proofed to be valid and reliable instruments for use in foot and ankle patients. MOXFQ showed better outcomes in responsiveness.     

Structural validity of the foot and ankle outcome score for orthopaedic pathologies with Rasch Measurement Theory

BackgroundThe Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) is one of the most frequently used patient-reported outcome measures for foot and ankle conditions. The aim is to test the structural validity of the Finnish version of the FAOS using Rasch Measurement Theory.MethodsFAOS scores were obtained from 218 consecutive patients who received operative treatment for foot and ankle conditions. The FAOS data were fitted into the Rasch model and person separation index (PSI) calculated.ResultsAll the five subscales provided good coverage and targeting. Three subscales presented unidimensional structure. Thirty-eight of the 42 items had ordered response category thresholds. Three of the 42 items had differential item functioning towards gender. All subscales showed sufficient fit to the Rasch model. PSI ranged from 0.73 to 0.94 for the subscales.ConclusionsThe Finnish version of the FAOS shows acceptable structural validity for assessing complaints in orthopaedic foot and ankle patients.     

Comparing the outcomes between Chopart,Lisfranc and multiple metatarsal shaft fractures

Objectives

Complex midfoot injuries could lead to severe functional impairment of mobility and quality of daily living. Aim of this study was to compare the clinical and functional outcomes of Chopart, Lisfranc fractures and multiple metatarsal shaft fractures.

Design

Retrospective case series.

Setting

Level one trauma center.

Intervention

Open or closed reduction and internal fixation with screws, K-wires, plates, external fixation or combination of different technics.

Main outcome measurements

The American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Midfoot Score and the Maryland Foot Score were used to assess pain and functional outcome. 3D gait analysis, pedobarographic analysis and radiologic examinations were performed. The activity level was measured by a step counting accelerometer. All results were compared to an age-matched healthy control group.

Results

24 patients with a median age of 44 years (16–72) were included: 12 patients with multiple metatarsal shaft fractures, 6 patients with Chopart and 6 patients with Lisfranc fractures. The median follow-up was 2.6 years. The pedobarographic analysis reports reduced contact time of the total foot (p = 0.08), the forefoot (p = 0.008) and the hallux (p = 0.015) for the injured foot. A median score of 64 for the SF-36, 64 for the AOFAS Midfoot Score and 73 for the Maryland Foot Score indicated a poor restoration of foot function. Multiple metatarsal shaft fractures presented a significantly lower walking speed (p = 0.03) and cadence (p = 0.04).

Conclusion

The worst results were reported for multiple metatarsal shaft fractures on outcome scores, pedobarography, gait analysis and activity. Metatarsal serial fractures should not be underestimated as well as Chopart and Lisfranc fractures.

Level of evidence

Level IV.     

A mid-term follow-up retrospective evaluation of tarsometatarsal joint fracture-dislocations treated by closed reduction and percutaneous K-wires fixation

IntroductionInjuries involving the tarsometatarsal (TMT) joint are relatively uncommon, and the surgical treatment is potentially characterized by a high complications rate. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the results of the treatment of Lisfranc fracture-dislocations treated with closed reduction and percutaneous fixation with K-wires, considering complications and re-intervantion rate.Materials and methodsA retrospective review was performed on all patients undergone closed reduction and percutaneous fixation with K-wires of a Lisfranc fracture-dislocation. Patients have been clinically evaluated at last follow up by American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) midfoot score and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), as well as by radiograph assessment.ResultsFollowing inclusion and exclusion criteria, 15 patients have been included, with a mean age of 48.2 ± 5.6 years. Average follow-up was 3.8 ± 1.8 years (range 1–6). 7 fractures analyzed were classified as type A, 7 as type B (3 were B1, 4 were B2) and 1 as type C1. No case of loss of reduction has been observed at radiographic 1-month follow-up. At last follow-up mean AOFAS midfoot score and VAS score were respectively 82.2 ± 10.4 and 1.5 ± 1.3. Registered complications showed one deep vein thrombosis and 2 cases of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). One patient subsequently underwent arthrodesis of the tarsometatarsal joint for post-traumatic arthritis.ConclusionsThe treatment of the fracture-dislocations of the Lisfranc joint by percutaneous reduction and fixation with K-wire can achieve good clinical outcomes with a low rate of complications and reoperations.Level of EvidenceLevel IV     

Validity and Reliability of the European Foot and Ankle Society (EFAS) Score in Patients With Hallux Valgus in Singapore

The European Foot and Ankle Society score is a popular tool for monitoring treatment outcomes of foot or ankle conditions. However, few studies have assessed its psychometric properties in patients with hallux valgus. We aimed to validate the European Foot and Ankle Society score in patients with hallux valgus in Singapore. This is a cohort study of 121 patients with operatively managed hallux valgus from a tertiary referral hospital, evaluated preoperatively and at 6 months postoperatively with the primary endpoint of restoring patients to premorbid status. Internal consistency was assessed via Cronbach's alpha. Construct validity was assessed through 7 a priori hypotheses by correlating the European Foot and Ankle Society score with other patient‐reported outcomes measures. Structural validity was assessed via Confirmatory Factor Analysis, whereby a good fit was indicated when Comparative Fit Index >0.95, Tucker‐Lewis Index >0.95, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation <0.06, and Standardized Root Mean Residuals <0.08. Among our subjects, the European Foot and Ankle Society score demonstrated reliability, reflected by a good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.773). Six out of the 7 a priori hypotheses were fulfilled, indicating both convergent and divergent construct validity. Structural validity was confirmed with our European Foot and Ankle Society score model which showed good fit for a 1‐factor structure (Confirmatory Factor Analysis = 0.998, Tucker‐Lewis Index = 0.996, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation = 0.025 [90% CI: 0-0.111], Standardized Root Mean Residuals = 0.027). In conclusion, the European Foot and Ankle Society score was validated for monitoring treatment outcomes of patients with hallux valgus in Singapore.     

Long-term functional outcomes of all-inside arthroscopic repair of anterior talofibular ligament avulsion fracture

BackgroundThe main purpose of this study was to describe the all-inside arthroscopic technique for repairing anterior talofibular ligament (ATFL) avulsion fractures at the attachment points of the fibula and talus, and to evaluate the functional outcomes during long-term follow-up.MethodsThe data of 78 patients with ATFL avulsion fracture treated in our hospital from August 2013 to November 2016 were analyzed retrospectively. All patients underwent surgery. Patients were divided into two groups according to whether they had undergone all-inside arthroscopic treatment or open treatment. The American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, Karlsson Ankle Functional Score (KAFS), Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) and a 36-item Short Form Health Survey questionnaire (SF-36) were used to evaluate functional outcomes.ResultsThe postoperative follow-up period was 24–48 months. All patients reported subjective improvements to ankle stability without any nerve, blood vessel or tendon complications. At the final follow-up, there was no significant difference in the AOFAS, SF-36 or sport participation rate between the arthroscopic group and the open group; however, the KAFS and FAOS were significantly higher in the arthroscopic group than in the open group.ConclusionsFor ATFL avulsion fractures, the all-inside ankle arthroscopic procedure produced better outcomes than did the open procedure. The all-inside ankle arthroscopic procedure provides a minimally invasive technique with acceptable long-term functional outcomes.     

Validating the Foot and Ankle Outcome score for measuring foot dysfunction among hallux valgus surgery patients using item response theory

BackgroundThere is an absence of high quality research validating instruments that measure foot and ankle related quality of life among hallux valgus (bunion) patients’ perspectives. The Foot and Ankle Outcome Scale is a patient-reported outcome instrument, that when administered to patients with symptomatic hallux valgus, provides a patient-centric perspective of their foot function. The aim of this study is to assess the psychometric properties of the instrument’s five subscales among preoperative bunion surgery patients.MethodsThe Foot and Ankle Outcome Scale instrument measures Pain, Symptoms, Activities of Daily Living, Sport and Recreational Activities and Foot/Ankle Related Quality of Life. Preoperative data is collected from a sample of patients scheduled for surgical treatment of their condition in Vancouver, Canada. Classical and item response theory methods are used to report on reliability, validity and differential item functioning among subgroups.ResultsThis study included 249 surveys, representing an overall response rate of 44.1% among 564 eligible patients. The instrument demonstrated high reliability for all subscales, though 18 items across subscales, exhibited poor discrimination between item levels. Four items score differently according to patients’ sex and one item scored differently by age.ConclusionsThe instrument measures five domains of health important to bunion patients. These findings suggest that the current instrument can be used with an understanding of its limitations, including redundant questions and sex-based differences. Future research should revise a number of items. The results highlight the importance of the psychometric analyses of instruments in specific patient populations.     

Structural validity of the Finnish Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ) using the Rasch model

BackgroundThe 16-item patient-reported Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ) with subscales of pain, social interactions, and walking/standing has been claimed for strongest scientific evidence in measuring foot and ankle complaints. This study tests the validity of the Finnish MOXFQ for orthopaedic foot and ankle population using the Rasch analysis.MethodsWe translated the MOXFQ into Finnish and used that translation in our study. MOXFQ scores were obtained from 183 patients. Response category distribution, item fit, coverage, targeting, item dependency, ability to measure latent trait (unidimensionality), internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha), and person separation index (PSI) were analyzed.ResultsFifteen of the items had ordered response categories and/or sufficient fit statistics. The subscales provided coverage and targeting. Some residual correlation was noted. Removing one item in the pain subscale led to a unidimensional structure. Alphas and PSIs ranged between 0.68–0.90 and 0.67–0.92, respectively.ConclusionsDespite some infractions of the Rasch model, the instrument functioned well. The subscales of the MOXFQ are meaningful for assessing patient-reported complaints and outcomes in orthopaedic foot and ankle population.     

Clinical Outcome Scoring of Intra-articular Calcaneal Fractures

Outcome reporting of intra-articular calcaneal fractures is inconsistent. This study aimed to identify the most cited outcome scores in the literature and to analyze their reliability and validity. A systematic literature search identified 34 different outcome scores. The most cited outcome score was the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) hindfoot score, followed by the Maryland Foot Score (MFS) and the Creighton-Nebraska score (CN). Reliability (internal consistency) and validity (content, construct, and criterion) were determined for the 3 outcome scoring systems. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha, reliability) was similar for the Maryland Foot Score (alpha=0.82) and American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society hindfoot score (alpha=0.78), but lower for the Creighton-Nebraska (alpha = 0.61). Floor and ceiling effects were good for all 3 scores. The individual items within these outcome scores showing best content validity were pain, return to work, subtalar range of motion, walking distance, ankle range of motion, and gait abnormalities or limping. Construct validity was good for all individual items except sagittal motion, stability at physical exam, and shoe size. The 3 outcome scores showed high correlation with patient satisfaction as measured with a visual analog scale (VAS, criterion validity) and indication for an arthrodesis. In conclusion, pending consensus, we would recommend choosing between the widely accepted, reliable and valid AOFAS hindfoot and the Maryland Foot Score as the scoring systems of choice. LEVEL OF CLINICAL EVIDENCE: 2.     

Lisfranc关节损伤手术治疗的疗效评估

目的：探讨手术治疗Lisfranc关节损伤的临床疗效。方法：自2003年1月至2009年9月,手术治疗Lis-franc关节损伤57例,男41例,女16例;年龄20～64岁,平均33.8岁。按照Myerson分类：中柱损伤31例,中柱合并内侧柱损伤15例,三柱损伤11例。受伤当日手术25例,受伤后3～11d（平均7d）手术32例。结果：切口均一期愈合,平均手术时间50min;所有患者获随访,时间4～70个月,平均35个月。患者平均AOFAS评分为（84.73±14.26）分,患者术后5.1个月（3～12个月）恢复正常生活。52例解剖复位患者平均AOFAS评分（87.63±13.71）,5例未解剖复位者平均AOFAS评分（74.31±21.96）。多柱损伤患者26例平均AOFAS评分（76.58±11.51）。有8例患者并发创伤性骨关节炎,是患者中最主要的并发症。结论：手术治疗Lisfranc关节损伤能够重建跖跗关节复合体的稳定性,可取得满意的复位和临床疗效。术中复位质量与治疗结果密切相关。     

The effect of the Tscherne injury pattern on the outcome of operatively treated Lisfranc fracture dislocations

BackgroundLisfranc fracture dislocations cause severe tarso-metatarsal malalignment. The research question of this study was to evaluate the severity of the soft tissue injury on the final clinical outcome and compare that with the effect of various determinants on the disability in daily living activities after open reduction and internal fixation of a Lisfranc injury.MethodsThis study consisted of a retrospective analysis of patients with Lisfranc fracture dislocations who were treated by open reduction and internal fixation beween 2004 and 2009. Evaluation focused mainly on the severity of the soft tissue injury, age, fracture classification, time to operation, posttraumatic osteoarthritis, and the results were compared with American Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) scores, and Foot and Ankle Disability Index (FADI). Eight patients had Tscherne Grade 1, 13 had Grade 2, and 11 had Grade 3 soft tissue injuries. Myerson classification revealed 11 type A, 8 type B and 13 type C fractures. Six patients’ operations were delayed beyond 8 h.ResultsOf the 38 patients treated in the study period, 32 patients (11 female, 21 male; <30 y-old: 14, >30 y-old: 18) were available for complete follow-up (average, 55.5 months). The comparison of treatment results revealed that those patients with high grade soft tissue injuries had lower AOFAS and FADI scores (43.8 ± 15.9, 53.7 ± 9.4, respectively) when compared to Tscherne Grade 1 injuries (82.8 ± 6.1, 109 ± 13.9, respectively) (p < 0.001). The overall negative impact of the severity of soft tissue injury on functional outcomes had similar significance with regard to post-traumatic osteoarthritis, and fracture type. There was also a statistically significant difference between outcome measures and post-reduction quality (p = 0.002). Patient age (p = 0.9) and delayed surgery (p = 0.5) had no statistically significant effect on the final outcome.ConclusionsSatisfactory results can be achieved with open reduction for Lisfranc injuries. However, despite this treatment, both the severity of the soft tissue injury and non-anatomic reduction are negative prognostic factors in the treatment of Lisfranc fracture dislocations.     

Development and validation of the Sports Athlete Foot and Ankle Score: An instrument for sports-related ankle injuries

BackgroundMany existing scoring systems assess ankle function, but there is no evidence that any of them has been validated in a group of patients with a higher demand on their ankle function. Problems include ceiling effects, not being able to detect change or they do not contain a sports-subscale. The aim of this study was to create a validated self-administered scoring system for ankle injuries in the higher performing athlete.MethodsFirst, 26 patients were interviewed to solicit opinions needed to create the final score, which is modified from the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS). Second, SAFAS was validated in a group of 25 athletes with and 14 athletes without ankle injury. It is a self-administered region specific sports foot and ankle score that contains four subscales assessing the levels of symptoms, pain, daily living and sports.ResultsThe Spearman correlation coefficients between SAFAS and the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) ranged from 0.78 to 0.88. Content validity is established by key informant interviews, expert opinions and a high satisfaction rate of 75%. Cronbach's alpha indicated good internal consistency of each subscale ranging from 0.77 to 0.92.ConclusionSAFAS has shown good evidence for being a valid instrudent for assessing sports-related ankle injuries in high-performing athletes.