The Ankle-GO™ score predicts return to sport after surgically treated unstable syndesmotic injuries.

PURPOSE: Objective return to sport (RTS) criteria following syndesmotic stabilization are limited. The purpose of this study was to explore the discriminative and predictive ability of the Ankle-GO™ score for RTS status following syndesmotic stabilization. METHODS: At 3 and 6 months postoperatively, 50 patients were assessed using the Ankle-GOTM score, which consists of four functional tests and two self-reported questionnaires. At 6 months, patients reported their RTS status using three possible responses: no RTS, RTS at a lower level or RTS at the same or a higher level than before injury. Responsiveness of Ankle-GOTM was calculated by comparing 3- and 6-month scores using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test for paired samples. Discriminant validity was calculated by comparing 6-month scores between patients according to their RTS status. Area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) and logistic regression with odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to determine the ability of the 3-month Ankle-GOTM score to predict RTS status at 6 months. RESULTS: At 6 months, 80% of patients (40) RTS, with 58% of these (29 patients) at their pre-injury level. The median Ankle-GO™ score increased significantly from 13 points (interquartile range [IQR], 10.0-16.0) at 3 months to 19 points (IQR, 16.0-22.0) at 6 months (p < 0.0001). The 3-month score showed excellent predictive ability of RTS status at 6 months (AUC = 0.93; 95% CI: 0.86-1.00). Patients scoring above 12 points are more likely to RTS (OR = 42.78, 95% CI: 2.33-785.93, p < 0.01). A score above 14 points predicted RTS to the preinjury level (AUC = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.73-0.94; OR = 9.44, 95% CI: 2.66-40.7, p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: The Ankle-GO™ demonstrated promising discriminative and predictive ability for assessing RTS status after syndesmotic stabilization. Further studies are needed to confirm these results and the ability of this tool to identify patients who will suffer recurrence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prospective cohort study.