The predictive value of the multiple hop test for first-time noncontact lateral ankle sprains

ABSTRACT

The predictive value of the multiple hop test for first-time noncontact lateral ankle sprains. Background: Lateral ankle sprains (LAS) are very common sports injuries, cause high health care costs and are associated with postural control deficits. From a preventive point of view, clinicians should dispose valid field tests to identify athletes at risk for a LAS. The aim of this study is to evaluate the predictive value of the multiple hop test (MHT) for first-time noncontact LAS. Methods: Non-elite athletes (n = 232) performed the MHT at baseline. During a 12-month follow-up period, all noncontact LAS related to health care costs were recorded. Outcomes of the MHT (completion time, balance errors and perceived difficulty) between the injured and uninjured group were compared and odds ratios (OR) and relative risks (RR) were calculated using a logistic regression analysis. Results: Ten first-time noncontact LAS were recorded (4.3%). Injured athletes made significantly more change-in-support strategy (CSS) errors when compared to uninjured athletes (p = .04). The OR of the number of CSS errors was 1.14 (p = .03), the RR 4.1 (p = .04). Conclusions: Athletes scoring > 12 CSS errors, have a four times increased risk for a first-time noncontact LAS. The MHT is a valid field test to identify athletes at risk for a first-time noncontact LAS.

KEYWORDS:

• Prognosis
• lateral ankle sprain
• postural control
• injury risk

Author Contributions

Lynn Leemans, PT, contributed to the design of the study, to the acquisition of the data, to the analysis of the data, to the drafting of the article and to the final approval of the submitted version

Margo De Mesmaeker; PT, contributed to the design of the study, to the acquisition of the data, to the analysis of the data, to the drafting of the article and to the final approval of the submitted version

Roel De Ridder, PhD, contributed to the design of the study, to the acquisition of the data, to the analysis of the data, to the drafting of the article and to the final approval of the submitted version

David Beckwée, PhD, contributed to the analysis of the data, to the drafting of the article and to the final approval of the submitted version

Filip Struyf, PhD, contributed to the design of the study, to the drafting of the article and to the final approval of the submitted version.

Filip Roosen, PhD, contributed to the design of the study, to the drafting of the article and to the final approval of the submitted version

Ronald Buyl, PhD, contributed to the analysis of the data, to the drafting of the article and to the final approval of the submitted version

Koen Putman, PhD, contributed to the analysis of the data, to the drafting of the article and to the final approval of the submitted version

Peter Vaes, PhD, contributed to the design of the study, to the drafting of the article and to the final approval of the submitted version

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.