Imperial College London
Portrait Picture

ProfessorAlisonMcGregor

Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgery & Cancer

Professor of Musculoskeletal Biodynamics
 
 
 
//

Contact

 

+44 (0)20 7594 2972a.mcgregor

 
 
//

Location

 

Room 202ASir Michael Uren HubWhite City Campus

//

Summary

 

Publications

Citation

BibTex format

@article{Allott:2022:10.1186/s12891-022-05595-0,
author = {Allott, N and McGregor, A and Banger, M},
doi = {10.1186/s12891-022-05595-0},
journal = {BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders},
title = {Evaluating the diagnostic pathway for acute ACL injuries in trauma centres: A systematic review},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-022-05595-0},
volume = {23},
year = {2022}
}
Download

RIS format (EndNote, RefMan)

TY  - JOUR
AB  - Objective: This review sought to evaluate the literature on the initial assessment and diagnostic pathway for patients with a suspected Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) tear.Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL were systematically searched for eligible studies, PRISMA guidelines were followed. Studies were included if they used at least one assessment method to assess for ACL injury and participants were assessed at an acute trauma centre within 6-weeks of injury. Article quality was evaluated using the QUADAS-2 checklist. Results: A total of 353 studies were assessed for eligibility, 347 were excluded for the following reasons: injuries were not assessed in an acute trauma setting, injuries were not acute, participants had previous ACL injuries or chronic joint deformities affecting the knee, participants were under 18, or participants included animals or cadavers.  A total of six studies were included in the review. Common assessment methods included: laxity tests, joint effusion, inability to continue activity, and a history of a ‘pop’ and ‘giving way’ at the time of injury. Diagnostic accuracy varied greatly between the assessment method and the assessing clinician. Gold standard diagnostics were MRI and arthroscopy.  A weighted meta-mean calculated the time to reach diagnosis to be 68.60 days [CI 23.94, 113.24]. The mean number of appointments to reach diagnosis varied from 2-5. Delay to surgery or surgical consultation ranged from 61 to 328 days. Conclusion: Clinicians in the Emergency Department are not proficient in performing the assessment methods that are used for diagnosis in acute ACL injury. Reliance on specialist assessments or radiological methods inevitably increases the time to reach a diagnosis, which has repercussions on management options. There is an ever-growing demand to improve diagnostic accuracy and efficiency; further exploration into , quantitative measures of instability would aid the assessment of peripheral joi
AU  - Allott,N
AU  - McGregor,A
AU  - Banger,M
DO  - 10.1186/s12891-022-05595-0
PY  - 2022///
SN  - 1471-2474
TI  - Evaluating the diagnostic pathway for acute ACL injuries in trauma centres: A systematic review
T2  - BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-022-05595-0
UR  - https://bmcmusculoskeletdisord.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12891-022-05595-0
UR  - http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/97865
VL  - 23
ER  -
Download