The purpose of this paper is to introduce the Sports Ankle Rating System and provide the initial validation for its use. As its name implies, this outcomes measurement system is intended for use in assessing the functional outcomes of athletes with ankle injuries. This unique system consists of three distinct instruments: the Quality of Life Measure, the Clinical Rating Score, and the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation. We began the validation process of the Sports Ankle Rating System with subjects who had sustained lateral ankle sprains because this is the most common injury in sports. The results of this study indicate that the Sports Ankle Rating System is:
effective at assessing the impact that an ankle sprain has on an athlete's functional and psychosocial status
responsive to changes in an athlete's ankle-related health status, and
Foot and Ankle Questionnaire. Outcomes Data Collection Questionnaires, Version 2.0. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons / Council of Musculoskeletal Specialty Societies, March, 1998.
2.
BergnerM: Quality of life, health status, and clinical research. Med Care, 27:S148–156, 1989.
3.
BosienWStaplesORussellS: Residual disability following acute ankle sprains. J Bone Joint Surg, 37A:1237–1243, 1955.
4.
BrayTJEndicottMCapraSE: Treatment of open ankle fractures. Immediate internal fixation vs. closed immobilization and delayed fixation. Clin. Orthop, 47–52, 1989.
5.
Budiman-MakEConradKJRoachKE: The Foot Function Index: a measure of foot pain and disability. J Clin Epidemiol, 44:561–570, 1991.
6.
DeBerardinoTMArcieroRATaylorDC: Arthroscopic treatment of soft-tissue impingement of the ankle in athletes. Arthroscopy, 13:492–498, 1997.
FayersPMachinD: Quality of Life: Assessment, Analysis, and Interpretation, Chichester, John Wiley & Sons, LTD, 2000, pp 1–27.
9.
GarrickJG: The frequency of injury, mechanism of injury, and epidemiology of ankle sprains. Am J Sports Med, 5:241–242, 1977.
10.
GarrickJGRequaRK: The epidemiology of foot and ankle injuries in sports. Clin Sports Med, 7:29–36, 1988.
11.
GerberJPWilliamsGNScovilleCRArcieroRATaylorDC: Persistent disability associated with ankle sprains: a prospective examination of an athletic population. Foot Ankle Int, 19:653–660, 1998.
12.
KaikkonenAKannusPJarvinenM: A performance test protocol and scoring scale for the evaluation of ankle injuries. Am J Sports Med, 22:462–469, 1994.
13.
KellerRBRudicelSALiangMH: Outcomes research in orthopaedics. Instr Course Lect, 43:599–611, 1994.
MartinDPEngelbergRAgelJSnappDSwiontkowskiMF: Development of a musculoskeletal extremity health status instrument: the Musculoskeletal Function Assessment instrument. J Orthop Res, 14:173–181, 1996.
16.
MartinDPEngelbergRAgelJSwiontkowskiMF: Comparison of the Musculoskeletal Function Assessment questionnaire with the Short Form-36, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, and the Sickness Impact Profile health-status measures. J Bone Joint Surg, 79A:1323–1335, 1997.
17.
McHorneyCAHaleySMWareJEJr: Evaluation of the MOS SF-36 Physical Functioning Scale (PF-10): II. Comparison of relative precision using Likert and Rasch scoring methodsJ Clin Epidemiol, 50:451–461, 1997.
18.
McHorneyCAWareJEJrLuJFSherbourneCD: The MOS 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): III. Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability across diverse patient groupsMed Care, 32:40–66; 1994.
19.
McHorneyCAWareJEJrRaczekAE: The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructsMed Care, 31:247–263, 1993.
20.
MohtadiN: Quality of life assessment as an outcome of anterior cruciate ligament reconstructive surgery. In JacksonD (ed): The Anterior Cruciate Ligament: Current and Future Concepts, New York, Raven Press, 1993, pp. 439–440.
21.
Ogilvie-HarrisDJReedSC: Disruption of the ankle syndesmosis: diagnosis and treatment by arthroscopic surgery. Arthroscopy, 10:561–568, 1994.
22.
PatrickDLDeyoRA: Generic and disease-specific measures in assessing health status and quality of life. Med Care, 27:S217–232, 1989.
23.
PortneyLWatkinsM: Foundations of Clinical Research: Applications to Practice, Norwalk, Appleton and Lange, 2000, pp. 557–586.
24.
PugiaMLMiddelCJSewardSWPollockJLHallRCLoweLMahonyLHendersonNE: Comparison of acute swelling and function in subjects with lateral ankle injury. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther, 31:384–388, 2001.
25.
SeligsonDGassmanJPopeM: Ankle instability: evaluation of the lateral ligaments. Am J Sports Med, 8:39–42, 1980.
26.
TroidlHKuscheJVestweberKHEypaschEKoeppenLBouillonB: Quality of life: an important endpoint both in surgical practice and research. J Chronic Dis, 40:523–528, 1987.
27.
WalkerSRosserR: Quality of Life: Assessment and Application, Lancaster, MTP Press Limited, 1987, pp 1–49.
28.
WareJEJrSherbourneCD: The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care, 30:473–483, 1992.
29.
WilliamsGNTaylorDCGangelTJUhorchakJMArcieroRA: Comparison of the single assessment numeric evaluation method and the Lysholm score. Clin Orthop, 373:184–192, 2000.
30.
WilliamsGNGangelTJArcieroRAUhorchakJMTaylorDC: Comparison of the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation method and two shoulder rating scales. Outcomes measures after shoulder surgeryAm J Sports Med, 27:214–221, 1999.
