RééDOC
75 Boulevard Lobau
54042 NANCY cedex

Christelle Grandidier Documentaliste
03 83 52 67 64


F Nous contacter

0

Article

--";3! O
     

-A +A

Recalibration and validation of the Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool cutoff score for individuals with chronic ankle instability

WRIGHT CJ; ARNOLD BL; ROSS SE; LINENS SW
ARCH PHYS MED REHABIL , 2014, vol. 95, n° 10, p. 1853-1859
Doc n°: 171606
Localisation : Documentation IRR

D.O.I. : http://dx.doi.org/DOI:10.1016/j.apmr.2014.04.017
Descripteurs : DE75 - PATHOLOGIE - CHEVILLE
Article consultable sur : http://www.archives-pmr.org

OBJECTIVE: To independently recalibrate and revalidate the Cumberland Ankle
Instability Tool (CAIT) cutoff score for discriminating individuals with and
without chronic ankle instability (CAI). There are concerns the original cutoff
score (</=27) may be suboptimal for use in the CAI population. DESIGN: Case
control. SETTING: Research laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: Two independent datasets
were used (total N=200). Dataset 1 included 61 individuals with a history of >/=1
ankle sprain and >/=2 episodes of giving way in the last year (CAI group) and 57
participants with no history of ankle sprain or instability in their lifetime
(uninjured group). Dataset 2 included 27 uninjured participants, 29 participants
with CAI, and 26 individuals with a history of a single ankle sprain and no
subsequent instability (copers). INTERVENTIONS: All participants completed the
CAIT during a single session. In dataset 1, a receiver operating characteristic
(ROC) curve was calculated using the CAIT score and group membership as test
variables. The ideal cutoff score was identified using the Youden index. The
recalibrated cutoff score was validated in dataset 2 using the ROC analysis and
clinimetric characteristics. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: CAIT cutoff score and
clinimetrics. RESULTS: In dataset 1, the optimal cutoff score was </=25, which is
lower than previously reported. In dataset 2, the recalibrated cutoff score
demonstrated a sensitivity of 96.6%, specificity of 86.8%, positive likelihood
ratio of 7.318, and negative likelihood ratio of .039. There were 7 false
positives and 1 false negative. CONCLUSIONS: The recalibrated CAIT score
demonstrated very good clinimetric properties; all properties improved compared
with the original cutoff score. Clinicians using the CAIT should use the
recalibrated cutoff score to maximize test characteristics. Caution should be
taken with copers, who had a high rate of false positives.
CI - Copyright (c) 2014 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Published by
Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Langue : ANGLAIS

Mes paniers

4

Gerer mes paniers

0