Critical Appraisal of Research Literature
MASTERS IN PODIATRY
HMP1005
CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF RESEARCH LITERATURE
EFFECT PF ACCELERATED REHABILITATION ON FUNCTION AFTER ANKLE SPRAIN: RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL
MARCH 2011-03-16
WORD COUNT 2095
Effect of Accelerated Rehabilitation on Function after Ankle Sprain: Randomised Controlled trial.
The above study is to compare an intervention group utilising an accelerated exercise programme post injury against the standard protocol of rest, ice, compression and elevation (RICE). The following is to critically appraise the above quantitative piece of research with some guidance from the Critically Appraisal Skills Programme tool. The abstract gives clear objectives to the aims of the researchers and the chosen setting to allocate participants is pertinent to the research question. The samples for the trial are chosen at random a method considered as gold standard due to their design in attempt to remove bias, a technique considered to provide internal validity (Sibbald and Roland, 1998). The primary and secondary outcomes to be measured in the abstract are clearly focused, but to a non-statistician, the results section appear to be a barrage of figures and do not initially provoke further reading.
The introduction informs the reader of the estimated cases of ankle injury in the U.K. and its implications but gives no indication to the costs incurred to the NHS. Unfortunately it reports the estimated costs in the Netherlands and fails to explain the costs to the Royal Victoria Hospital in Belfast, or the sports injury clinic at the University of Ulster, where the research had been carried out. The authors made it clear of the prevalence of the injury that occurs in the UK but a more profound impact to engage the reader could be achieved if the costs to the UK rather than the Netherlands had been discussed. As the article was printed in the British Medical Journal in 2010, utilising a electronic data base search to ascertain these costs, the
HMP1005
CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF RESEARCH LITERATURE
EFFECT PF ACCELERATED REHABILITATION ON FUNCTION AFTER ANKLE SPRAIN: RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL
MARCH 2011-03-16
WORD COUNT 2095
Effect of Accelerated Rehabilitation on Function after Ankle Sprain: Randomised Controlled trial.
The above study is to compare an intervention group utilising an accelerated exercise programme post injury against the standard protocol of rest, ice, compression and elevation (RICE). The following is to critically appraise the above quantitative piece of research with some guidance from the Critically Appraisal Skills Programme tool. The abstract gives clear objectives to the aims of the researchers and the chosen setting to allocate participants is pertinent to the research question. The samples for the trial are chosen at random a method considered as gold standard due to their design in attempt to remove bias, a technique considered to provide internal validity (Sibbald and Roland, 1998). The primary and secondary outcomes to be measured in the abstract are clearly focused, but to a non-statistician, the results section appear to be a barrage of figures and do not initially provoke further reading.
The introduction informs the reader of the estimated cases of ankle injury in the U.K. and its implications but gives no indication to the costs incurred to the NHS. Unfortunately it reports the estimated costs in the Netherlands and fails to explain the costs to the Royal Victoria Hospital in Belfast, or the sports injury clinic at the University of Ulster, where the research had been carried out. The authors made it clear of the prevalence of the injury that occurs in the UK but a more profound impact to engage the reader could be achieved if the costs to the UK rather than the Netherlands had been discussed. As the article was printed in the British Medical Journal in 2010, utilising a electronic data base search to ascertain these costs, the
References: Adams, J., Khan, H.T.A., Dr Raeside, R., and White, D.,I., (2007). Research Methods for Graduate Business and Social Science Student. Sage Publications: London. Bekerom, M., P., V., and Kerkhoffs, G., M., M., J., (2010). Critical comments on: “Effect of accelerated rehabilitation on function after ankle sprain: randomised control trial” British Medical Journal. 344 Binkley, J.,M., Stratford Bowers, D., (1996). Statistics from Scratch, An introduction for Health Care Professionals. West Wiley and Sons Ltd: Chichester Burns, N., and Grove, S.,K, (2001) Chan, Y., H., (2003). Randomised Controlled Trial (RCTs) – Essentials. Singapore Medical Journal 44 (2) Hollis., (1999) Lee, P., (2006). Understanding and critiquing quantitative research papers. Nursing Times. 102 (28) Marieb, E.N., (1998) Roland, M., and Torgerson, D., J., (1998). Understanding controlled trials: What are Pragmatic trials? British Medical Journal. 326 (1075) Salmond, S.,S., (2008) Schulv,K., F., and Grimes, D., A., (2002). Generation of allocation sequences in randomised trials: chance, not choice. The Lancet (359) February 9 Sibbald, B., and Roland, M., (1998)