From: Evaluating the diagnostic pathway for acute ACL injuries in trauma centres: a systematic review
Author | Study components | Study reference number | Meantime to reach diagnosis (days) | Sample size | Mean number of appointments to reach diagnosis |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ball et al. 2010 [12] | Before acute knee clinic (AKC) | 1 | 123 | 100 | 5 |
Post-AKC | 2 | 14 | 100 | 1 | |
Lee and Yun 2019 [17] | Ultrasound | 3 | 3.8 | 62 | 2 |
Hardy et al. 2017 [3] | Follow up arranged | 4 | 29 | 120 | – |
Follow up arranged with initial diagnosis removed | 5 | 46 | 101 | ||
No follow up arranged | 6 | 198 | 43 | ||
No follow up arranged with initial diagnosis removed | 7 | 229 | 40 | ||
Wang et al. 2016 [7] | Aspirated knee group’ | 8 | 6.7 | 18 | – |
Non-aspirated | 9 | 6.0 | 42 | ||
Parwaiz et al. 2016 [6] | Those presenting to an Emergency Department | – | Not documented – although only 5% reached initially | 78 | – |
Clifford et al. 2021 [9] | Whole Participant sample | 10 | 115 | 61 | 3.3 |
Meta Mean | 11 | 68.60 | – | – |