MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 8966 voluntary school students aged 13-15 years old were recruited for scoliosis screening. Screening was done by measuring the angle of trunk rotation (ATR) on forward bending test (FBT) using a scoliometer. ATR of 5 degrees or more was considered positive. Positively screened students had standard radiographs done for measurement of the Cobb angle. Cobb angle of >10° was used to diagnose scoliosis. The percentage of radiological assessment referral, prevalence rate and PPV of scoliosis were then calculated.
RESULTS: Percentage of radiological assessment referral (ATR >5°) was 4.2% (182/4381) for male and 5.0% (228/4585) for female. Only 38.0% of those with ATR >5° presented for further radiological assessment. The adjusted prevalence rate was 2.55% for Cobb angle >10°, 0.59% for >20° and 0.12% for >40°. The PPV is 55.8% for Cobb angle >10°, 12.8% for >20° and 2.6% for > 40°.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest study of school scoliosis screening in Malaysia. The prevalence rate of scoliosis was 2.55%. The positive predictive value was 55.8%, which is adequate to suggest that the school scoliosis screening programme did play a role in early detection of scoliosis. However, a cost effectiveness analysis will be needed to firmly determine its efficacy.
DESIGN: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL were systematically searched (1990-April 2020) for studies describing the prevalence of NP and PS in knee and hip osteoarthritis using self-report questionnaires. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed. Statistical heterogeneity between studies and sub-groups (affected joint and population source as a proxy for disease severity) was assessed (I2 statistic and the Chi-squared test).
RESULTS: From 2,706 non-duplicated references, 39 studies were included (2011-2020). Thirty-six studies reported on knee pain and six on hip pain. For knee osteoarthritis, the pooled prevalence of NP was: using PainDETECT, possible NP(score ≥13) 40% (95%CI 32-48%); probable NP(score >18) 20% (95%CI 15-24%); using Self-Report Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs, 32% (95%CI 26-38%); using Douleur Neuropathique (DN4) 41% (95% CI 24-59%). The prevalence of PS using Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI) was 36% (95% CI 12-59%). For hip osteoarthritis, the pooled prevalence of NP was: using PainDETECT, possible NP 29% (95%CI 22-37%%); probable NP 9% (95%CI 6-13%); using DN4 22% (95%CI 12-31%) in one study. The prevalence of possible NP pain was higher at the knee (40%) than the hip (29%) (difference 11% (95% CI 0-22%), P = 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Using self-report questionnaire tools, NP was more prevalent in knee than hip osteoarthritis. The prevalence of NP in knee and hip osteoarthritis were similar for each joint regardless of study population source or tool used. Whether defining NP using self-report questionnaires enables more effective targeted therapy in osteoarthritis requires investigation.
Materials and Methods: An online survey of 35 questions was conducted to evaluate impact on (i) general orthopaedic practice (ii) hospital protocols (iii) out-patient practice (iv) surgical practice (v) personal protective equipment (PPE) use and (vi) post-lockdown preparedness.
Results: A total number of 588 practising orthopaedic surgeons from India completed the survey. Majority (88.3%) found severe impact (>50%) on trauma surgery and non-trauma surgery with significant reduction in out -patient attendance compared to corresponding time in 2019. There were significant changes made in individual hospital protocols (91.7 %). Appropriate required PPE was available in majority of the hospitals (74.3%). No remodelling or upgrading of the existing operating theatre infrastructure was done by most surgeons (89.5%).
Conclusion: This pan India survey of orthopaedic surgeons has indicated that COVID-19 has had a profound impact on their outpatient and surgical trauma and non-trauma practice, due to the lockdown and resulted in significant changes to hospital protocols. Preparedness to resume clinical and surgical practice was associated with anxiety in two-thirds of the respondents. Majority of the orthopaedic practitioners felt that they would continue to conduct pre-operative COVID-19 screening and use PPE even after the lockdown is over.
Materials and methods: We reviewed four patients with neurofibromatosis with severe PT spinal deformity. Case 1, a 16-year-old male presented with severe PT kyphoscoliosis (scoliosis: 89°, kyphosis: 124°) and thoracic myelopathy. Case 2 was a 14-year-old, skeletally immature male who presented with a PT lordoscoliosis (scoliosis: 85°). Case 3, a 13-year-old male, presented with severe PT kyphoscoliosis (scoliosis: 100°, kyphosis: 95°). Case 4, a 35-year-old gentleman, presented with severe PT kyphoscoliosis (scoliosis: 113°, kyphosis: 103°) and thoracic myelopathy. All patients underwent pre-operative halo-pelvic traction. After a period of traction, all patients underwent posterior spinal fusion (PSF) with autologous bone grafts (local and fibula bone grafts) and recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2).
Results: Both patients with thoracic myelopathy regained near normal neurological status after halo-pelvic traction. Following traction, the scoliosis correction rate (CR) ranged from 18.0% to 38.9%, while the kyphosis CR ranged from 14.6% to 37.1%. Following PSF, the scoliosis CR ranged from 24.0% to 58.8%, while the kyphosis CR ranged from 29.1% to 47.4%. The total distraction ranged from 50-70mm. Duration of distraction ranged from 26-95 days. The most common complication encountered during halo-pelvic traction was pin-related e.g. pin tract infection, pin loosening and migration, osteomyelitis, and halo-pelvic strut breakage. No patients had cranial nerve palsies or neurological worsening.
Conclusion: Pre-operative correction of severe PT spinal deformities could be performed safely and effectively with the halo-pelvic device prior to definitive surgery.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six sounds (broadband noise, rain, ocean, waterfall, Quranic chapters Al-Fatihah, and Yasin recitations) were calibrated at the intensity levels of 45, 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, and 80dBA. The sounds were delivered through a pair of Sennheiser HD 280 Pro headphones connected to the Sound Blaster X-Fi Surround 5.1 Pro sound card. The long-term average of the sound pressure level over the time of recording (LAseq) was recorded using the 3M SoundPro Class 1 1/3 Octave RTA sound level meter (SLM). The desired intensity levels were obtained by making adjustments to the sound files via the Audacity® software.
RESULTS: All sound files were calibrated at the targeted levels as verified by the value of LAseq.
CONCLUSIONS: Calibration of audio files can be done using a free/open-source software, as all six sound files were successfully calibrated at the targeted levels of 45, 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, and 80dBA. The calibration steps provided in this paper can be easily applied by other researchers for similar purposes, with precautions when calibrating at low levels.