Functional management of ankle sprains: what volume and intensity of walking is undertaken in the first week

BACKGROUND:
Acute ankle sprains are usually managed functionally, with advice to undertake progressive weight-bearing and walking. Mechanical loading is an important modular of tissue repair; therefore, the clinical effectiveness of walking after ankle sprain may be dose dependent. The intensity, magnitude and duration of load associated with current functional treatments for ankle sprain are unclear.
AIM:
To describe physical activity (PA) in the first week after ankle sprain and to compare results with a healthy control group.
METHODS:
Participants (16-65 years) with an acute ankle sprain were randomised into two groups (standard or exercise). Both groups were advised to apply ice and compression, and walk within the limits of pain. The exercise group undertook additional therapeutic exercises. PA was measured using an activPAL accelerometer, worn for 7 days after injury. Comparisons were made with a non-injured control group.
RESULTS:
The standard group were significantly less active (1.2 ± 0.4 h activity/day; 5621 ± 2294 steps/day) than the exercise (1.7 ± 0 .7 h/day, p=0.04; 7886 ± 3075 steps/day, p=0.03) and non-injured control groups (1.7 ± 0.4 h/day, p=0.02; 8844 ± 2185 steps/day, p=0.002). Also, compared with the non-injured control group, the standard and exercise groups spent less time in moderate (38.3 ± 12.7 min/day vs 14.5 ± 11.4 min/day, p=0.001 and 22.5 ± 15.9 min/day, p=0.003) and high-intensity activity (4.1 ± 6.9 min/day vs 0.1 ± 0.1 min/day, p=0.001 and 0.62 ± 1.0 min/day p=0.005).
CONCLUSION:
PA patterns are reduced in the first week after ankle sprain, which is partly ameliorated with addition of therapeutic exercises. This study represents the first step towards developing evidence-based walking prescription after acute ankle sprain.

Conservative fluid management or deresuscitation for patients with sepsis or acute respiratory distress syndrome following the resuscitation phase of critical illness: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

It is unknown whether a conservative approach to fluid administration or deresuscitation (active removal of fluid using diuretics or renal replacement therapy) is beneficial following haemodynamic stabilisation of critically ill patients.

Purpose

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of conservative or deresuscitative fluid strategies in adults and children with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), sepsis or systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) in the post-resuscitation phase of critical illness.

Methods

We searched Medline, EMBASE and the Cochrane central register of controlled trials from 1980 to June 2016, and manually reviewed relevant conference proceedings from 2009 to the present. Two reviewers independently assessed search results for inclusion and undertook data extraction and quality appraisal. We included randomised trials comparing fluid regimens with differing fluid balances between groups, and observational studies investigating the relationship between fluid balance and clinical outcomes.

Results

Forty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Marked clinical heterogeneity was evident. In a meta-analysis of 11 randomised trials (2051 patients) using a random-effects model, we found no significant difference in mortality with conservative or deresuscitative strategies compared with a liberal strategy or usual care [pooled risk ratio (RR) 0.92, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.82–1.02, I2 = 0 %]. A conservative or deresuscitative strategy resulted in increased ventilator-free days (mean difference 1.82 days, 95 % CI 0.53–3.10, I2 = 9 %) and reduced length of ICU stay (mean difference −1.88 days, 95 % CI −0.12 to −3.64, I2 = 75 %) compared with a liberal strategy or standard care.

Conclusions

In adults and children with ARDS, sepsis or SIRS, a conservative or deresuscitative fluid strategy results in an increased number of ventilator-free days and a decreased length of ICU stay compared with a liberal strategy or standard care. The effect on mortality remains uncertain. Large randomised trials are needed to determine optimal fluid strategies in critical illness.