There is a consensus that conservative methods should be used before operative interventions. Current evidence for conservative treatment favors eccentric loading and shock wave therapy, although there is limited evidence by which to judge their effectiveness. Evaluation of operative interventions has been mostly retrospective and remains inconclusive.

ObjectiveThe objective of this qualitative research study is to explore patient experiences of ankle fracture and the factors most important to them in recovery.DesignSemistructured interviews exploring patient experiences of ankle fracture recovery at 16–23 weeks following injury. Interviews followed a topic guide and were recorded with an encrypted audio recorder and then transcribed verbatim. Thematic content analysis was used to identify themes in the data.SettingIndividuals were recruited from a sample of participants of a UK-based clinical trial of immobilisation methods for ankle fracture (ISRCTN15537280 at the pre-results stage at time of writing). Interviews were conducted at the participants’ own homes or on a university campus setting.ParticipantsA purposive sample was used to account for key variables of age, gender and fracture management. Participants recruited from the clinical trial sample were adults aged 18 years or over with a closed ankle fracture.ResultsTen participants were interviewed, five of whom were female and six of whom needed an operation to fix their ankle fracture. The age range of participants was 21–75 years with a mean of 51.6 years. Eight themes emerged from the data during analysis; mobility, loss of independence, healthcare, psychological effects, social and family life, ankle symptoms, sleep disturbance and fatigue, and activities of daily living. Factors of importance to participants included regaining their independence, sleep quality and quantity, ability to drive, ability to walk without walking aids or weight-bearing restrictions, and radiological union.ConclusionsThe results of this research demonstrates the extensive impact of ankle fracture on individuals’ lives, including social and family life, sleep, their sense of independence and psychological well-being. The results of this study will enable an increased understanding of the factors of relevance to individuals with ankle fracture, allowing collection of appropriate outcomes in clinical studies for this condition. Ultimately these results will help formulate appropriate patient-centred rehabilitation plans for these patients.Trial registration numberISRCTN15537280; Pre-results

BackgroundThe Achilles tendon Total Rupture Score was developed by a research group in 2007 in response to the need for a patient reported outcome measure for this patient population. Beyond this original development paper, no further validation studies have been published.Consequently the purpose of this study was to evaluate internal consistency, convergent validity and responsiveness of this newly developed patient reported outcome measure within patients who have sustained an isolated acute Achilles tendon rupture.MethodsSixty-four eligible patients with an acute rupture of their Achilles tendon completed the Achilles tendon Total Rupture Score alongside two further patient reported outcome measures (Disability Rating Index and EQ 5D). These were completed at baseline, six weeks, three months, six months and nine months post injury. The Achilles tendon Total Rupture Score was evaluated for internal consistency, using Cronbach's alpha, convergent validity, through correlation analysis and responsiveness, by analysing floor and ceiling effects and calculating its relative efficiency in comparison to the Disability Rating Index and EQ 5D scores.ResultsThe Achilles tendon Total Rupture Score demonstrated high internal consistency (Cronbachs alpha > 0.8) and correlated significantly (p < 0.001) with the Disability Rating Index at five time points (pre-injury, six weeks, three, six and nine months) with correlation coefficients between -0.5 and -0.9. However, the confidence intervals were wide. Furthermore, the ability of the new score to detect clinically important changes over time (responsiveness) was shown to be greater than the Disability Rating Index and EQ 5D.ConclusionsA universally accepted outcome measure is imperative to allow comparisons to be made across practice. This is the first study to evaluate aspects of validity of this newly developed outcome measure, outside of the developing centre. The ATRS demonstrated high internal consistency and responsiveness, with limited convergent validity. This research provides further support for the use of this outcome measure, however further research is required to advocate its universal use in patients with acute Achilles tendon ruptures. Such areas include inter-rater reliability and research to determine the minimally clinically important difference between scores.All authors have read and concur with the content of this manuscript. The material presented has not been and will not be submitted for publication elsewhere, except as an abstract. All authors have made substantial contributions to all of the following: (1) the conception and design of the study, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data, (2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content and (3) final approval of the submitted version. This research has been funded by Arthritis Research UK, no conflicts of interests have been declared by the authors.Kind RegardsRebecca Kearney (corresponding author)Research Physiotherapist

The Achilles tendon Total Rupture Score was identified as the only outcome measure which has demonstrated multiple facets of validity for use in this patient group. However, even this tool has limitations. Researchers should be aware of the limitations of the available outcome measurement tools and check on their validity before use in clinical research.