A pooled analysis of the Ottawa ankle rules used on adults in the ED

American Journal of Emergency Medicine

Volumn 16, Issue 6, 1998, Pages 564-567

  Markert, Ronald J ^a   Walley, Mary E ^a   Guttman, Todd G ^a   Mehta, Rahul ^a  

^a WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Adult; Ankle injuries; Data pooling; Emergency medical services

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANKLE INJURY; ANKLE RADIOGRAPHY; ARTICLE; CANADA; CLINICAL FEATURE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC APPROACH ROUTE; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; EMERGENCY HEALTH SERVICE; FOOT INJURY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NEW ZEALAND; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0031685125     PISSN: 07356757     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0735-6757(98)90219-4     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Woolf SH: Practice guidelines: A new reality in medicine, I. Recent developments. Arch Intern Med 1990;150:1811-1818
2. Stiell IG, Greenberg GH, McKnight RD, et al: A study to develop clinical decision rules for the use of radiography in acute ankle injuries. Ann Emerg Med 1992;21:384-390
3. Stiell IG, Greenberg GH, McKnight RD, et al: Decision rules for the use of radiography in acute ankle injuries: Refinement and prospective validation. JAMA 1993;269:1127-1132
4. Stiell IG, McKnight RD, Greenberg GH, et al: Implementation of the Ottawa ankle rules. JAMA 1994;271:827-832
5. Anis AH, Stiell IG, Steward DG, et al: Cost-effectiveness analysis of the Ottawa ankle rules. Ann Emerg Med 1995;26:422-428
6. Pigman EC, Klug RK, Sanford S, et al: Evaluation of the Ottawa clinical decision rules for the use of radiography in acute ankle and midfoot injuries in the emergency department: An independent site assessment. Ann Emerg Med 1994;24:41-45
7. Kerr L, Kelly A-M, Grant J, et al: Failed validation of a clinical decision rule for the use of radiography in acute ankle injury. N Z Med J 1994;107:294-295 (Erratum published in N Z Med J 1994;107:363. Order of first three authors: Kelly A-M, Richards D, Kerr L.)
8. Solomito AL, Singal BM, Radack M: Ankle radiography in the emergency department: a prospective validation of Ottawa ankle rules. Acad Emerg Med 1994;1:A64 (abstr)
9. Lucchesi GM, Jackson RE, Peacock WF, et al: Sensitivity of the Ottawa rules. Ann Emerg Med 1995;26:1-5
10. Dawson-Saunders B, Trapp RG. Basic and Clinical Biostatistics. Norwalk, CT, Appleton & Lange, 1994
11. Stiell IG, Greenberg GH, McKnight RD, et al: Ottawa ankle rules for radiography of acute injuries, N Z Med J 1995;108:111 (letter)
12. Chassin MR: Standard of care in medicine. Inquiry 1988;25: 437-453
13. Eichhorn TH: Prevention of intra operative anesthesia accidents and related severe injury through safety monitoring. Anesthesiology 1989;70:572-577
14. Havighurst CC: Practice guidelines as legal standard governing physician liability. Law Contemp Problems 1991;54:87-117
15. Hall MA: The defensive effect of medical practice policies in malpractice litigation. Law Contemp Problems 1991;54:119-145
16. Holzer JF: The advent of clinical standards for professional liability. Quality Rev Bull 1990;16:71-79
17. Physician Payment Review Commission: Annual Report to Congress. Washington, DC, Physician Payment Review Commission, 1990
18. Stiell I, Wells G, Laupacis A, et al: Multicentre trial to introduce the Ottawa ankle rules for use of radiography in acute ankle injuries. BMJ 1995;311:594-597
19. Chande VT: Decision rules for roentgenography of children with acute ankle injuries. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 1995;149:255-258
20. Smith GF, Madlon-Kay DJ, Hunt V: Clinical evaluation of ankle inversion injuries in family practice offices. J Fam Pract 1993;37:345-348