↓ Skip to main content

Ankle brachial index for the diagnosis of lower limb peripheral arterial disease

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
43 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
156 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Ankle brachial index for the diagnosis of lower limb peripheral arterial disease
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2016
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010680.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fay Crawford, Karen Welch, Alina Andras, Francesca M Chappell

Abstract

Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) of the lower limb is common, with prevalence of both symptomatic and asymptomatic disease estimated at 13% in the over 50 age group. Symptomatic PAD affects about 5% of individuals in Western populations between the ages of 55 and 74 years. The most common initial symptom of PAD is muscle pain on exercise that is relieved by rest and is attributed to reduced lower limb blood flow due to atherosclerotic disease (intermittent claudication). The ankle brachial index (ABI) is widely used by a variety of healthcare professionals, including specialist nurses, physicians, surgeons and podiatrists working in primary and secondary care settings, to assess signs and symptoms of PAD. As the ABI test is non-invasive and inexpensive and is in widespread clinical use, a systematic review of its diagnostic accuracy in people presenting with leg pain suggestive of PAD is highly relevant to routine clinical practice. To estimate the diagnostic accuracy of the ankle brachial index (ABI) - also known as the ankle brachial pressure index (ABPI) - for the diagnosis of peripheral arterial disease in people who experience leg pain on walking that is alleviated by rest. We carried out searches of the following databases in August 2013: MEDLINE (Ovid SP),Embase (Ovid SP), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (EBSCO), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences (LILACS) (Bireme), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and the Health Technology Assessment Database in The Cochrane Library, the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science, the British Library Zetoc Conference search and Medion. We included cross-sectional studies of ABI in which duplex ultrasonography or angiography was used as the reference standard. We also included cross-sectional or diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) cohort studies consisting of both prospective and retrospective studies.Participants were adults presenting with leg pain on walking that was relieved by rest, who were tested in primary care settings or secondary care settings (hospital outpatients only) and who did not have signs or symptoms of critical limb ischaemia (rest pain, ischaemic ulcers or gangrene).The index test was ABI, also called the ankle brachial pressure index (ABPI) or the Ankle Arm Index (AAI), which was performed with a hand-held doppler or oscillometry device to detect ankle vessels. We included data collected via sphygmomanometers (both manual and aneroid) and digital equipment. Two review authors independently replicated data extraction by using a standard form, which included an assessment of study quality, and resolved disagreements by discussion. Two review authors extracted participant-level data when available to populate 2×2 contingency tables (true positives, true negatives, false positives and false negatives).After a pilot phase involving two review authors working independently, we used the methodological quality assessment tool the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2), which incorporated our review question - along with a flow diagram to aid reviewers' understanding of the conduct of the study when necessary and an assessment of risk of bias and applicability judgements. We screened 17,055 records identified through searches of databases. We obtained 746 full-text articles and assessed them for relevance. We scrutinised 49 studies to establish their eligibility for inclusion in the review and excluded 48, primarily because participants were not patients presenting solely with exertional leg pain, investigators used no reference standard or investigators used neither angiography nor duplex ultrasonography as the reference standard. We excluded most studies for more than one reason.Only one study met the eligibility criteria and provided limb-level accuracy data from just 85 participants (158 legs). This prospective study compared the manual doppler method of obtaining an ABI (performed by untrained personnel) with the automated oscillometric method. Limb-level data, as reported by the study, indicated that the accuracy of the ABI in detecting significant arterial disease on angiography is superior when stenosis is present in the femoropopliteal vessels, with sensitivity of 97% (95% confidence interval (CI) 93% to 99%) and specificity of 89% (95% CI 67% to 95%) for oscillometric ABI, and sensitivity of 95% (95% CI 89% to 97%) and specificity of 56% (95% CI 33% to 70%) for doppler ABI. The ABI threshold was not reported. Investigators attributed the lower specificity for doppler to the fact that a tibial or dorsalis pedis pulse could not be detected by doppler in 12 of 27 legs with normal vessels or non-significant lesions. The superiority of the oscillometric (automated) method for obtaining an ABI reading over the manual method with a doppler probe used by inexperienced operators may be a clinically important finding. Evidence about the accuracy of the ankle brachial index for the diagnosis of PAD in people with leg pain on exercise that is alleviated by rest is sparse. The single study included in our review provided only limb-level data from a few participants. Well-designed cross-sectional studies are required to evaluate the accuracy of ABI in patients presenting with early symptoms of peripheral arterial disease in all healthcare settings. Another systematic review of existing studies assessing the use of ABI in alternative patient groups, including asymptomatic, high-risk patients, is required.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 43 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 156 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 155 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 31 20%
Unspecified 29 19%
Student > Master 26 17%
Researcher 17 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 10%
Other 37 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 59 38%
Unspecified 39 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 28 18%
Engineering 5 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 3%
Other 21 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 April 2019.
All research outputs
#628,702
of 13,616,025 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,995
of 10,679 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,455
of 262,511 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#44
of 181 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,616,025 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,679 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 262,511 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 181 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.