4.3 Article

The incidence of Achilles tendon ruptures in Edmonton, Canada

Journal

FOOT & ANKLE INTERNATIONAL
Volume 26, Issue 11, Pages 932-936

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/107110070502601106

Keywords

Achilles tendon; epidemiology; incidence; rupture

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The incidence of Achilles tendon ruptures specific to the North American population has not been previously reported and current epidemiological data are primarily reported from European communities. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of Achilles tendon ruptures in the city of Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, and to compare this data to those reported in European studies. Methods: A retrospective chart review from all five acute care hospitals in Edmonton from 1998 to 2002 (inclusive) were reviewed for Achilles tendon ruptures. Data such as gender, age, side, mechanism of injury, and season of injury were obtained. Results: The incidence of Achilles tendon ruptures ranged from an annual average of 5.5 ruptures to 9.9 ruptures per 100,000 inhabitants with an overall mean of 8.3 ruptures per 100,000 people. There was a statistically significant difference in Achilles tendon ruptures over the last two study years for both genders (women, p < 0.02; men, p < 0.03). The mean age for an Achilles tendon rupture was 40.6 years for men and 44.5 years for women. The Achilles tendon ruptures occurred most frequently in the 30 to 39 and 40 to 49 year old age groups in both men and women, respectively (p < 0.02). Most ruptures occurred in the spring season, but there was no statistical difference in the incidence of Achilles tendon ruptures by season (p > 0.05). Conclusions: The incidence of Achilles tendon ruptures in this community was comparable to those reported in European communities (range 6 to 37 ruptures per 100,000 people), although a bimodal age distribution of rupture previously reported was not observed in this study.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available