2016 ASM / R-0011
How Consistently Are the Ottawa Ankle Rules Applied in a Major Metropolitan Health Network's Emergency Departments in Australia? - a Retrospective Review
Keywords:
Emergency, Musculoskeletal bone, Plain radiographic studies, Audit and standards, Decision analysis, Patterns of Care
Authors:
C.-T. Cheng, D. Varma, D. Smit; VIC/AU
DOI:
10.1594/ranzcr2016/R-0011
References
- Stiell IG,
Greenberg GH,
McKnight RD,
Nair RC,
McDowell I,
Worthington JR.
A study to develop clinical decision rules for the use of radiography in acute ankle injuries.
Ann Emerg Med.
1992 Apr;21(4):384–90.
- Holroyd BR,
Wilson D,
Rowe BH,
Mayes DC,
Noseworthy T.
Uptake of validated clinical practice guidelines: experience with implementing the Ottawa Ankle Rules.
Am J Emerg Med.
2004 May;22(3):149–55.
- Cameron C,
Naylor CD.
No impact from active dissemination of the Ottawa Ankle Rules: further evidence of the need for local implementation of practice guidelines.
Can Med Assoc J.
1999 Apr 20;160(8):1165–8.
- Brand D,
Frazier W,
Kohlhepp W,
Shea K,
Hoefer A,
Ecker M,
et al.
A Protocol for Selecting Patients with Injured Extremities Who Need X-Rays.
N Engl J Med.
1982;306(6):333–9.
- Bachmann LM,
Kolb E,
Koller MT,
Steurer J,
Riet G ter.
Accuracy of Ottawa ankle rules to exclude fractures of the ankle and mid-foot: systematic review.
BMJ.
2003 Feb 22;326(7386):417.