METHODS: Forty-three participants (23 asymptomatic and 20 with CNP) underwent neck proprioception testing, returning to a NHP and THP in both sitting and standing positions (six trials for each test). A laser pointer was secured on the participant's forehead and inertial measurement unit (IMU) sensors were placed beneath the laser pointer and at the level of the spinous process of the seventh cervical vertebra. Both the absolute and the constant JPE were assessed.
FINDINGS: For the asymptomatic participants, good reliability (ICC: 0.79) was found only for right rotation of the THP task in sitting. In standing, good reliability (ICC: 0.77) was only found in flexion for the THP task. In standing, good reliability (ICC: 0.77) was only found for right rotation of the THP for the absolute JPE and left rotation (ICC: 0.85) for the constant error of the NHP task. In those with CNP, when tested in sitting, good reliability was found for flexion (ICC: 0.8) for the absolute JPE and good reliability (ICC range: 0.8-0.84) was found for flexion, extension, and right rotation for the constant JPE. In standing, good reliability (ICC range: 0.81-0.88) was found for flexion, and rotation for the absolute JPE. The constant JPE showed good reliability (ICC: 0.85) for right rotation and excellent reliability (ICC: 0.93) for flexion. Validity was weak to strong (r range: 0.26-0.83) and moderate to very strong (r range: 0.47-0.93) for absolute and constant error respectively, when tested in sitting. In standing, the validity was weak to very strong (0.38-0.96) for the absolute JPE and moderate to very strong (r range: 0.54-0.92) for the constant JPE.
CONCLUSION: The reliability of the measure of JPE when tested in sitting and standing in both groups showed good reliability, but not for all movements. The results of the current study also showed that the laser pointer correlated well with the Noraxon IMUs, but not for all movements. The results of the current study support the use of the JPE using a laser pointer in clinical and research settings.
METHODS: 63 patients who underwent remnant-preserving single-bundle PCL reconstruction between 2011 and 2018 with a minimum 2-year follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into two groups according to the femoral tunnel position: group A (33 patients with anatomical femoral tunnel) and group H (30 patients with high femoral tunnels). The femoral tunnel was positioned at the center (group A) or upper margin (group H) of the remnant anterolateral bundle. The position of the femoral tunnel was evaluated using the grid method on three-dimensional computed tomography. Clinical and radiological outcomes and failure rates were compared between the groups at the 2-year follow-up.
RESULTS: The position of the femoral tunnel was significantly high in group H than in group A (87.4% ± 4.2% versus 76.1% ± 3.7%, p motion, and posterior drawer test. Radiological outcomes also showed no intergroup differences in the side-to-side differences of posterior tibial translation and osteoarthritis progression. Side-to-side difference on the Telos stress radiograph was 5.2 ± 2.9 mm in group A and 5.2 ± 2.7 mm in group H (n.s.). There were four failures in group A (12.1%) and one in group H (3.3%). The differences between the groups were not statistically significant.
CONCLUSION: The clinical and radiological outcomes and failure rates of the high femoral tunnels were comparable with those of the anatomical femoral tunnels at the 2-year follow-up after remnant-preserving single-bundle PCL reconstruction. The findings of this study suggest that high femoral tunnels can be considered an alternative in remnant-preserving single-bundle PCL reconstruction.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
Methods: Bedside instruments that can be used includes a measuring tape, compass, goniometer, inclinometer and cervical range of motion (CROM) instrument.
Discussion: Cervical flexion-extension, lateral flexion and rotation will be assessed with bedside instruments. This would aid in increasing accuracy and precision of objective measurement while conducting clinical examination to determine the cervical range of motion.
Materials and Methods: A total of 30 patients with type V and VI proximal tibial fractures who presented between January 2012 to January 2015 were managed with hybrid external fixation and were followed-up for a period of 3 years.
Results: The mean age of the patients was 42.26 years with the left knee being more commonly affected. Schatzkers type V was the more common fracture type seen. The mean time to union was 12.06 weeks and the average range of motion achieved was 0 to 100°. The mean Rasmussens functional score was 25.4 at last follow-up and we had excellent results in 5 patients and good results in 22 patients.
Conclusion: Through this study, we conclude that the hybrid external fixation is an excellent option in the type V and VI fractures with extensive soft tissue compromise. It is easy to apply, facilitates early mobilisation of the joint and gives good functional results.
Materials and Methods: We identified and performed five primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasties between 1 May 2019 and 1 June 2020. All patients were contactable and available for analysis. Assessment of functional outcomes was performed using the Constant-Murley score, the patient satisfaction score (PSS), and imaging studies. The mean follow-up from operation to the time of reporting was 9.6 months (range, 3 to 14 months).
Results: The median age for our patients was 58 years (±11.91). The most common indication for surgery was post-traumatic arthritis, followed by rotator cuff arthropathy and osteoarthritis. The mean Constant score improved from 9.0 pre-operatively to 52.3 post-operatively at a mean of 9.6 months. The majority of the patients were satisfied with the surgery as the post-operative range of motion, especially anterior elevation and abduction, improved in four of our patients and there were no short-term complications, for example, of infection or revisions, reported at the last follow-up.
Conclusion: This study has shown that reverse total shoulder arthroplasty can yield good short-term outcomes for the treatment of complex shoulder problems in addition to cuff tear arthropathy. It should be considered a treatment for rotator cuff tears, severe arthritis and ≥ 3 parts proximal humeral fractures.
Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and radiologic outcomes of remnant-preserving PCL reconstruction using anatomic versus low tibial tunnels. We hypothesized that the outcomes of low tibial tunnel placement would be superior to those of anatomic tibial tunnel placement at the 2-year follow-up after remnant-preserving PCL reconstruction.
Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the data for patients who underwent remnant-preserving PCL reconstruction between March 2011 and January 2018 with a minimum follow-up of 2 years (N = 63). On the basis of the tibial tunnel position on postoperative computed tomography, the patients were divided into those with anatomic placement (group A; n = 31) and those with low tunnel placement (group L; n = 32). Clinical scores (International Knee Documentation Committee subjective score, Lysholm score, and Tegner activity level), range of motion, complications, and stability test outcomes at follow-up were compared between the 2 groups. Graft signal on 1-year follow-up magnetic resonance imaging scans was compared between 22 patients in group A and 17 patients in group L.
Results: There were no significant differences between groups regarding clinical scores or incidence of complications, no between-group differences in posterior drawer test results, and no side-to-side difference on Telos stress radiographs (5.2 ± 2.9 mm in group A vs 5.1 ± 2.8 mm in group L; P = .900). Postoperative 1-year follow-up magnetic resonance imaging scans showed excellent graft healing in both groups, with no significant difference between them.
Conclusion: The clinical and radiologic outcomes and complication rate were comparable between anatomic tunnel placement and low tibial tunnel placement at 2-year follow-up after remnant-preserving PCL reconstruction. The findings of this study suggest that both tibial tunnel positions are clinically feasible for remnant-preserving PCL reconstruction.
METHODS: A total of 11 participants with NS-NP were recruited. Pain intensity, active range of motion (AROM), posture, deep neck flexor (DNF) endurance, combined neck movements and disability were measured using face-to-face and TR methods, with a one-hour break in between. TelePTsys, an image-based TR system, was used for TR assessment.
RESULTS: A high degree of concurrent validity for pain (bias = 0.90), posture (bias = 0.96°), endurance (bias = -2.3 seconds), disability (bias = 0.10), AROM (extension bias = -0.60 cm, flexion bias = 1.2 cm, side flexion bias = -1.00, rotation bias = -0.30 cm) was found. Standard error of measurement and coefficient of variation (CV) values were within the acceptable level for concurrent validity, except the CV for cervical flexion and endurance. There was a high degree of reliability demonstrated for pain, posture, AROM, endurance and disability measurements. The average-measure interclass correlation coefficient (ICC(3,1)) ranged from 0.96 to 0.99 for inter-rater, and 0.93 to 0.99 for intra-rater reliabilities. There was moderate agreement for combination movement for validity (78.5%, p
METHODS: We conducted a randomized controlled study on patients with closed fracture of the distal end of the radius requiring open reduction and plating from January 2019 till April 2020. We recruited 65 patients (33 patients in the WALANT group and 32 patients in the GA group). Randomization was done via block randomization. Data were collected to evaluate preoperative anxiety using the Amsterdam Preoperative Anxiety and Information Scale (APAIS) score, intraoperative pain score during injection (baseline) (V1), 10 minutes after injection (V2), during incision (V3), during gentle manipulation (V4), during aggressive manipulation (V5) and during first drilling of screw (V6), blood loss, duration of surgery and post-operative pain score. Additionally, intraoperative visual analog scale (VAS) score was obtained in the WALANT group. At three weeks, six weeks, three months and six months after operation, the Quick Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) scores and range of motion (ROM) of the wrists were obtained.
RESULTS: The average age in the WALANT group was 47.19 (range, 36-64) years and GA group was 49.48 (range, 38-60) years. The mean APAIS score obtained was 7.78 (WALANT group) and 7.36 (GA group) with no statistical difference. For intraoperative VAS, only during V4 and V5 were the scores 1/10; otherwise at all other phases, the VAS score was 0. The average time for surgery was statistically longer in the WALANT group (61.22 minutes) compared to the GA group (55.33 minutes) (p = 0.003). There was no statistical difference in mean blood loss in both groups. The average post-operative VAS showed statistical significance only at 1 hour and 12 hours post-operation with no statistical difference at 2 and 24 hours post-operation. There was no difference in the post-operative ROM including wrist flexion, extension, supination and pronation for both groups up to six months' follow-up.
CONCLUSION: There was no statistically significant difference in terms of preoperative anxiety level, intraoperative and post-operative VAS score, amount of blood loss and clinical outcome in both groups for plating of the distal end radius. However, the operating time was slightly longer in the WALANT group. We conclude that distal radius plating under WALANT has similar outcomes to GA. In centres with limited resources, WALANT offers a safe, reliable and cheaper option, reserving GA time for head, abdominal and thoracic surgery.
Materials and Methods: This study was conducted between Oct 2010 to Dec 2015. One-hundred-fifty fracture shafts of the humerus were treated with the anteromedial plating through the anterolateral approach.
Results: One-hundred-fifty patients with a fracture shaft of the humerus were treated with anteromedial plating. Twenty were female (mean ±SD,28 years±4.5) and 130 were male (mean ± SD, 38 years±5.6). One hundred and forty-eight out of 150 (98.6%) patients achieved union at 12 months. Two of three patients developed a superficial infection, both of which were treated successfully by antibiotics and one developed a deep infection, which was treated by wound debridement, prolonged antibiotics with the removal of the plate and subsequently by delayed plating and bone grafting.
Conclusion: In the present study, we applied plate on the anteromedial flat surface of humerus using the anterolateral approach. It is an easier and quicker fixation as compared to anterolateral plating because later involved much more dissection than a medial application of the plate and this application of plate on a medial flat surface, does not required Radial nerve exposure and palsy post-operatively. The significant improvement in elbow flexion without brachialis dissection is also a potential benefit of this approach. Based on our results, we recommend the application of an anteromedial plate for treatment of midshaft fractures humerus.