IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0193662.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Population prevalence and distribution of ankle pain and symptomatic radiographic ankle osteoarthritis in community dwelling older adults: A systematic review and cross-sectional study

Author

Listed:
  • Charlotte Murray
  • Michelle Marshall
  • Trishna Rathod
  • Catherine J Bowen
  • Hylton B Menz
  • Edward Roddy

Abstract

Objectives: To identify by systematic review published prevalence estimates of radiographic ankle osteoarthritis (OA) and to subsequently estimate the prevalence of ankle pain and symptomatic, radiographic ankle OA within community-dwelling older adults from North Staffordshire, UK. Methods: Electronic databases were searched using terms for ankle, osteoarthritis and radiography. Data regarding population, radiographic methods, definitions and prevalence estimates of ankle OA were extracted from papers meeting predetermined selection criteria. Adults aged ≥50 years and registered with four general practices in North Staffordshire were mailed a health questionnaire. Ankle pain in the previous month was determined using a foot and ankle pain manikin. Respondents reporting pain in or around the foot in the last 12 months were invited to attend a research clinic where weight-bearing, antero-posterior and lateral ankle radiographs were obtained and scored for OA using a standardised atlas. Prevalence estimates for ankle pain and symptomatic, radiographic ankle OA were calculated using multiple imputation and weighted logistic regression, and stratified by age, gender and socioeconomic status. Results: Eighteen studies were included in the systematic review. The methods of radiographic classification of ankle OA were poorly reported and showed heterogeneity. No true general population prevalence estimates of radiographic ankle OA were found, estimates in select sporting and medical community-dwelling populations ranged from 0.0–97.1%. 5109 participants responded to the health survey questionnaire (adjusted response 56%). Radiographs were obtained in 557 participants. The prevalence of ankle pain was 11.7% (10.8,12.6) and symptomatic, radiographic ankle OA grade≥2 was 3.4% (2.3, 4.5) (grade≥1: 8.8% (7.9,9.8); grade = 3: 1.9% (1.0,2.7). Prevalence was higher in females, younger adults (50–64 years) and those with routine/manual occupations. Conclusion: No general population prevalence estimates of radiographic ankle OA were identified in the published literature. Our prevalence study found that ankle pain was common in community-dwelling older adults, whereas moderate to severe symptomatic, radiographic ankle OA occurred less frequently. Further investigations of the prevalence of ankle OA using more sensitive imaging modalities are warranted.

Suggested Citation

  • Charlotte Murray & Michelle Marshall & Trishna Rathod & Catherine J Bowen & Hylton B Menz & Edward Roddy, 2018. "Population prevalence and distribution of ankle pain and symptomatic radiographic ankle osteoarthritis in community dwelling older adults: A systematic review and cross-sectional study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(4), pages 1-21, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0193662
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0193662
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0193662
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0193662&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0193662?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0193662. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.