Evaluating Osteoarthritis Management Programs: outcome domain recommendations from the OARSI Joint Effort Initiative.

OBJECTIVE: To develop sets of core and optional recommended domains for describing and evaluating Osteoarthritis Management Programs (OAMPs), with a focus on hip and knee Osteoarthritis (OA). DESIGN: We conducted a 3-round modified Delphi survey involving an international group of researchers, health professionals, health administrators and people with OA. In Round 1, participants ranked the importance of 75 outcome and descriptive domains in five categories: patient impacts, implementation outcomes, and characteristics of the OAMP and its participants and clinicians. Domains ranked as "important" or "essential" by ≥80% of participants were retained, and participants could suggest additional domains. In Round 2, participants rated their level of agreement that each domain was essential for evaluating OAMPs: 0 = strongly disagree to 10 = strongly agree. A domain was retained if ≥80% rated it ≥6. In Round 3, participants rated remaining domains using same scale as in Round 2; a domain was recommended as "core" if ≥80% of participants rated it ≥9 and as "optional" if ≥80% rated it ≥7. RESULTS: A total of 178 individuals from 26 countries participated; 85 completed all survey rounds. Only one domain, "ability to participate in daily activities", met criteria for a core domain; 25 domains met criteria for an optional recommendation: 8 Patient Impacts, 5 Implementation Outcomes, 5 Participant Characteristics, 3 OAMP Characteristics and 4 Clinician Characteristics. CONCLUSION: The ability of patients with OA to participate in daily activities should be evaluated in all OAMPs. Teams evaluating OAMPs should consider including domains from the optional recommended set, with representation from all five categories and based on stakeholder priorities in their local context.

Are education, exercise and diet interventions a cost-effective treatment to manage hip and knee osteoarthritis? A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To identify research gaps and inform implementation we systematically reviewed the literature evaluating cost-effectiveness of recommended treatments (education, exercise and diet) for the management of hip and/or knee OA. METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, National Health Services Economic Evaluation Database, and EconLit from inception to November 2019 for trial-based economic evaluations investigating hip and/or knee OA core treatments. Two investigators screened relevant publications, extracted data and synthesized results. Risk of bias was assessed using the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria list. RESULTS: Two cost-minimization, five cost-effectiveness and 16 cost-utility analyses evaluated core treatments in six health systems. Exercise therapy with and without education or diet was cost-effective or cost-saving compared to education or physician-delivered usual care at conventional willingness to pay (WTP) thresholds in 15 out of 16 publications. Exercise interventions were cost-effective compared to physiotherapist-delivered usual care in three studies at conventional WTP thresholds. Education interventions were not cost-effective compared to usual care or placebo at conventional WTP thresholds in three out of four publications. CONCLUSIONS: Structured core treatment programs were clinically effective and cost-effective, compared to physician-delivered usual care, in five health care systems. Providing education about core treatments was not consistently cost-effective. Implementing structured core treatment programs into funded clinical pathways would likely be an efficient use of health system resources and enhance physician-delivered usual primary care.

Effectiveness of a lumbopelvic monitor and feedback device to change postural behaviour: the ELF cluster randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this clustered, randomised controlled trial was to assess the effectiveness of a lumbopelvic postural feedback device for changing postural behaviour in a group of healthcare workers. We hypothesised that workers exposed to auditory postural feedback would reduce the number of times forward bending posture is adopted at work. METHODS: This was a participant and assessor blinded, randomised, sham-controlled trial with blocked cluster random allocation. We recruited healthcare workers from aged care institutions. Healthcare sites were randomly allocated to the feedback or sham group (SG). A postural monitoring and feedback device was used to monitor and record lumbopelvic forward bending posture, and provided audio feedback whenever the user sustained lumbopelvic forward bending posture that exceeded predefined thresholds. The primary outcome measure was postural behaviour (exceeding thresholds). We used a robust variant of repeated measures mixed-effect model for assessing within-group and between-group differences in postural behaviour. RESULTS: We recruited 19 sites, and 130 healthcare workers participated. There were no within-group changes on the number of times postural threshold was exceeded at 1-week follow-up (feedback group: -0.7, 95% CI -2.61 to 0.72; SG -0.3, -1.65 to 0.98), and no differences (0.05, 95% CI -1.83 to 1.94) between SG and feedback group. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this trial indicate that audio feedback provided by a postural monitor device did not reduce the number of times healthcare workers exceeded the postural threshold. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12616000449437.

OARSI guidelines for the non-surgical management of knee, hip, and polyarticular osteoarthritis

To update and expand upon prior Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) guidelines by developing patient-focused treatment recommendations for individuals with Knee, Hip, and Polyarticular osteoarthritis (OA) that are derived from expert consensus and based on objective review of high-quality meta-analytic data. We sought evidence for 60 unique interventions. A systematic search of all relevant databases was conducted from inception through July 2018. After abstract and full-text screening by two independent reviewers, eligible studies were matched to PICO questions. Data were extracted and meta-analyses were conducted using RevMan software. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Evidence Profiles were compiled using the GRADEpro web application. Voting for Core Treatments took place first. Four subsequent voting sessions took place via anonymous online survey, during which Panel members were tasked with voting to produce recommendations for all joint locations and comorbidity classes. We designated non-Core treatments to Level 1A, 1B, 2, 3, 4A, 4B, or 5, based on the percentage of votes in favor, in addition to the strength of the recommendation. Core Treatments for Knee OA included arthritis education and structured land-based exercise programs with or without dietary weight management. Core Treatments for Hip and Polyarticular OA included arthritis education and structured land-based exercise programs. Topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were strongly recommended for individuals with Knee OA (Level 1A). For individuals with gastrointestinal comorbidities, COX-2 inhibitors were Level 1B and NSAIDs with proton pump inhibitors Level 2. For individuals with cardiovascular comorbidities or frailty, use of any oral NSAID was not recommended. Intra-articular (IA) corticosteroids, IA hyaluronic acid, and aquatic exercise were Level 1B/Level 2 treatments for Knee OA, dependent upon comorbidity status, but were not recommended for individuals with Hip or Polyarticular OA. The use of Acetaminophen/Paracetamol (APAP) was conditionally not recommended (Level 4A and 4B), and the use of oral and transdermal opioids was strongly not recommended (Level 5). A treatment algorithm was constructed in order to guide clinical decision-making for a variety of patient profiles, using recommended treatments as input for each decision node. These guidelines offer comprehensive and patient-centered treatment profiles for individuals with Knee, Hip, and Polyarticular OA. The treatment algorithm will facilitate individualized treatment decisions regarding the management of OA.

OARSI guidelines for the non-surgical management of knee, hip, and polyarticular osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To update and expand upon prior Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) guidelines by developing patient-focused treatment recommendations for individuals with Knee, Hip, and Polyarticular osteoarthritis (OA) that are derived from expert consensus and based on objective review of high-quality meta-analytic data. METHODS: We sought evidence for 60 unique interventions. A systematic search of all relevant databases was conducted from inception through July 2018. After abstract and full-text screening by two independent reviewers, eligible studies were matched to PICO questions. Data were extracted and meta-analyses were conducted using RevMan software. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Evidence Profiles were compiled using the GRADEpro web application. Voting for Core Treatments took place first. Four subsequent voting sessions took place via anonymous online survey, during which Panel members were tasked with voting to produce recommendations for all joint locations and comorbidity classes. We designated non-Core treatments to Level 1A, 1B, 2, 3, 4A, 4B, or 5, based on the percentage of votes in favor, in addition to the strength of the recommendation. RESULTS: Core Treatments for Knee OA included arthritis education and structured land-based exercise programs with or without dietary weight management. Core Treatments for Hip and Polyarticular OA included arthritis education and structured land-based exercise programs. Topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were strongly recommended for individuals with Knee OA (Level 1A). For individuals with gastrointestinal comorbidities, COX-2 inhibitors were Level 1B and NSAIDs with proton pump inhibitors Level 2. For individuals with cardiovascular comorbidities or frailty, use of any oral NSAID was not recommended. Intra-articular (IA) corticosteroids, IA hyaluronic acid, and aquatic exercise were Level 1B/Level 2 treatments for Knee OA, dependent upon comorbidity status, but were not recommended for individuals with Hip or Polyarticular OA. The use of Acetaminophen/Paracetamol (APAP) was conditionally not recommended (Level 4A and 4B), and the use of oral and transdermal opioids was strongly not recommended (Level 5). A treatment algorithm was constructed in order to guide clinical decision-making for a variety of patient profiles, using recommended treatments as input for each decision node. CONCLUSION: These guidelines offer comprehensive and patient-centered treatment profiles for individuals with Knee, Hip, and Polyarticular OA. The treatment algorithm will facilitate individualized treatment decisions regarding the management of OA.

Incremental clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of providing supervised physiotherapy in addition to usual medical care in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee: 2-year results of the MOA randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinical- and cost-effectiveness at 2-year follow-up of providing individual, supervised exercise physiotherapy and/or manual physiotherapy in addition to usual medical care. METHOD: People with hip or knee osteoarthritis meeting the American College of Rheumatology clinical diagnostic criteria were randomised (1:1, concealed, assessor-blinded) to four groups: usual medical care; supervised exercise physiotherapy; manual physiotherapy; or combined exercise and manual physiotherapy. Physiotherapy group participants were provided 10 50-min treatment sessions including booster sessions at 4 and 13 months, in addition to usual care. The primary outcome at 2-year follow-up was incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of each physiotherapy intervention in addition to usual care, compared with usual care alone, from the health system and societal perspectives. To allow interpretation of negative ICURs, we report incremental net benefit (INB). The primary clinical outcome was the Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). RESULTS: Of 206 patients, 186 (90·3%) were retained at 2-year follow-up. Exercise physiotherapy and manual physiotherapy dominated usual care, demonstrating cost savings; combined therapy did not. Exercise therapy had the highest incremental net benefits (INBs), statistically significant at all willingness-to-pay (base-case: societal New Zealand (NZ)$6,312, 95%CI 334 to 12,279; health system NZ$8,065, 95%CI 136 to 15,994). Clinical improvements were superior to usual care only in the exercise physiotherapy group (-28.2 WOMAC points, 95%CI -49.2 to -7.1). No serious adverse events were recorded. CONCLUSION: Individually supervised exercise therapy is cost-effective and clinically effective in addition to usual medical care at 2-year follow-up, and leads to cost savings for the health system and society. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Prospectively registered with the Australian NZ Clinical Trials Registry, reference ACTRN12608000130369.

Development and validation of a new population-based simulation model of osteoarthritis in New Zealand.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the construction and preliminary validation of a new population-based microsimulation model developed to analyse the health and economic burden and cost-effectiveness of treatments for knee osteoarthritis (OA) in New Zealand (NZ). METHOD: We developed the New Zealand Management of Osteoarthritis (NZ-MOA) model, a discrete-time state-transition microsimulation model of the natural history of radiographic knee OA. In this article, we report on the model structure, derivation of input data, validation of baseline model parameters against external data sources, and validation of model outputs by comparison of the predicted population health loss with previous estimates. RESULTS: The NZ-MOA model simulates both the structural progression of radiographic knee OA and the stochastic development of multiple disease symptoms. Input parameters were sourced from NZ population-based data where possible, and from international sources where NZ-specific data were not available. The predicted distributions of structural OA severity and health utility detriments associated with OA were externally validated against other sources of evidence, and uncertainty resulting from key input parameters was quantified. The resulting lifetime and current population health-loss burden was consistent with estimates of previous studies. CONCLUSION: The new NZ-MOA model provides reliable estimates of the health loss associated with knee OA in the NZ population. The model structure is suitable for analysis of the effects of a range of potential treatments, and will be used in future work to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of recommended interventions within the NZ healthcare system.

Exercise, manual therapy, and use of booster sessions in physical therapy for knee osteoarthritis: a multi-center, factorial randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: (1) Do treatment effects differ between participants receiving manual therapy (MT) with exercise compared to subjects who don't, (2) are treatment effects sustained better when participants receive booster sessions compared to those who don't over a one year period in subjects with knee osteoarthritis (KOA)? DESIGN: Multi-center, 2 × 2 factorial randomized clinical trial. 300 participants with knee OA were randomized to four groups: exercise-no boosters (Ex), exercise-with boosters (Ex+B), manual therapy+exercise-no boosters (MT+Ex), manual therapy+exercise-with boosters (MT+Ex+B). The primary outcome was the Western Ontario and McMaster osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) at 1 year. Secondary outcomes included knee pain, physical performance tests, and proportions of participants meeting treatment responder criteria. RESULTS: There were no differences between groups on the WOMAC at 1 year or on any performance-based measures. Secondary analyses indicated a) better scores on the WOMAC and greater odds of being a treatment responder at 9 weeks for participants receiving MT, b) greater odds of being a treatment responder at 1 year for participants receiving boosters. Exploratory interaction analysis suggested knee pain decreases for participants receiving boosters and increases for participants not receiving boosters from 9 weeks to 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: MT or use of boosters with exercise did not result in additive improvement in the primary outcome at 1 year. Secondary outcomes suggest MT may have some short term benefit, and booster sessions may improve responder status and knee pain at 1 year. However, the role of booster sessions remains unclear in sustaining treatment effects and warrants further study. CLINICAL TRIALS: gov (NCT01314183).

Validity of pain drawings for predicting psychological status outcome in patients with recurrent or chronic low back pain.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the association between baseline pain drawings and future psychological status, and estimate the prognostic value of pain drawing assessment for predicting somatization, distress, and depression at one-year follow-up, in patients with recurrent or chronic low back pain (RCLBP). METHODS: This was a multi-center prospective cohort study of 138 patients with RCLBP. Participating patients completed at baseline and one-year follow-up: a blank pain drawing; the Modified Somatic Perceptions Questionnaire; modified Zung Depression Scale; and Distress and Risk Assessment Method. Pain drawings were analyzed quantitatively using the Pain Sites Score (PSS) and Simple Body Region (SBR) method. The association between baseline pain drawing assessment and one-year psychological status was estimated using correlation and Relative Risk (RR) statistics. RESULTS: We obtained complete data from 81 patients (59%). Psychological status and pain drawings did not differ significantly between completers and non-completers. Pain drawing area at baseline was associated with depression and somatization at one-year follow-up (Spearman's Rho 0.25, P = 0.022; 0.31 P = 0.006, respectively). Stronger associations resulted from analyses using the PSS, compared with the SBR. Patients with abnormal PSS pain drawings at baseline had significantly greater RR of depression (RR 6.1, 95% CI 1.1, 33.5), somatization (RR 4.1, 95% CI 1.7, 9.9) and distress (RR 6.8, 95% CI 1.9, 25.3) at one-year follow-up. DISCUSSION: These results provide the first evidence that abnormal baseline pain drawings predict greater risk of abnormal psychological states or poor psychological outcome at one-year follow-up, in patients with RCLBP.

Manual therapy, exercise therapy, or both, in addition to usual care, for osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. 2: economic evaluation alongside a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost effectiveness of manual physiotherapy, exercise physiotherapy, and a combination of these therapies for patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. METHODS: 206 Adults who met the American College of Rheumatology criteria for hip or knee osteoarthritis were included in an economic evaluation from the perspectives of the New Zealand health system and society alongside a randomized controlled trial. Resource use was collected using the Osteoarthritis Costs and Consequences Questionnaire. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated using the Short Form 6D. Willingness-to-pay threshold values were based on one to three times New Zealand's gross domestic product (GDP) per capita of NZ$ 29,149 (in 2009). RESULTS: All three treatment programmes resulted in incremental QALY gains relative to usual care. From the perspective of the New Zealand health system, exercise therapy was the only treatment to result in an incremental cost utility ratio under one time GDP per capita at NZ$ 26,400 (-$34,081 to $103,899). From the societal perspective manual therapy was cost saving relative to usual care for most scenarios studied. Exercise therapy resulted in incremental cost utility ratios regarded as cost effective but was not cost saving. For most scenarios combined therapy was not as cost effective as the two therapies alone. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, exercise therapy and manual therapy were more cost effective than usual care at policy relevant values of willingness-to-pay from both the perspective of the health system and society. Trial registration number Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12608000130369.

OARSI recommended performance-based tests to assess physical function in people diagnosed with hip or knee osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To recommend a consensus-derived set of performance-based tests of physical function for use in people diagnosed with hip or knee osteoarthritis (OA) or following joint replacement. METHODS: An international, multidisciplinary expert advisory group was established to guide the study. Potential tests for consideration in the recommended set were identified via a survey of selected experts and through a systematic review of the measurement properties for performance-based tests. A multi-phase, consensus-based approach was used to prioritize and select performance-based tests by applying decision analysis methodology (1000Minds software) via online decision surveys. The recommended tests were chosen based on available measurement-property evidence, feasibility of the tests, scoring methods and expert consensus. RESULTS: Consensus incorporated the opinions of 138 experienced clinicians and researchers from 16 countries. The five tests recommended by the advisory group and endorsed by Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) were the 30-s chair-stand test, 40 m fast-paced walk test, a stair-climb test, timed up-and-go test and 6-min walk test. The first three were recommended as the minimal core set of performance-based tests for hip or knee OA. CONCLUSION: The OARSI recommended set of performance-based tests of physical function represents the tests of typical activities relevant to individuals diagnosed with hip or knee OA and following joint replacements. These tests are complementary to patient-reported measures and are recommended as prospective outcome measures in future OA research and to assist decision-making in clinical practice. Further research should be directed to expanding the measurement-property evidence of the recommended tests.

Manual therapy, exercise therapy, or both, in addition to usual care, for osteoarthritis of the hip or knee: a randomized controlled trial. 1: clinical effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of manual physiotherapy and/or exercise physiotherapy in addition to usual care for patients with osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip or knee. DESIGN: In this 2 × 2 factorial randomized controlled trial, 206 adults (mean age 66 years) who met the American College of Rheumatology criteria for hip or knee OA were randomly allocated to receive manual physiotherapy (n = 54), multi-modal exercise physiotherapy (n = 51), combined exercise and manual physiotherapy (n = 50), or no trial physiotherapy (n = 51). The primary outcome was change in the Western Ontario and McMaster osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) after 1 year. Secondary outcomes included physical performance tests. Outcome assessors were blinded to group allocation. RESULTS: Of 206 participants recruited, 193 (93.2%) were retained at follow-up. Mean (SD) baseline WOMAC score was 100.8 (53.8) on a scale of 0-240. Intention to treat analysis showed adjusted reductions in WOMAC scores at 1 year compared with the usual care group of 28.5 (95% confidence interval (CI) 9.2-47.8) for usual care plus manual therapy, 16.4 (-3.2 to 35.9) for usual care plus exercise therapy, and 14.5 (-5.2 to 34.1) for usual care plus combined exercise therapy and manual therapy. There was an antagonistic interaction between exercise therapy and manual therapy (P = 0.027). Physical performance test outcomes favoured the exercise therapy group. CONCLUSIONS: Manual physiotherapy provided benefits over usual care, that were sustained to 1 year. Exercise physiotherapy also provided physical performance benefits over usual care. There was no added benefit from a combination of the two therapies. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12608000130369.

The reliability and accuracy of an electromagnetic motion analysis system when used conjointly with an accelerometer.

The effect of an accelerometer driven electronic postural monitor (Spineangel®) placed within the electromagnetic measurement field of the Polhemus Fastrak™ is unknown. This study assessed the reliability and accuracy of Fastrak™ linear and angular measurements, when the Spineangel® was placed close to the sensor(s) and transmitter. Bland Altman plots and intraclass correlation coefficient (2,1) were used to determine protocol reproducibility and measurement consistency. Excellent reliability was found for linear and angular measurements (0.96, 95% CI: 0.90-0.99; and 1.00, 95% CI: 1.00-1.00, respectively) with the inclusion of Spineangel®; similar results were found, without the inclusion of Spineangel®, for linear and angular measurements, (0.96, 95% CI: 0.89-0.99; and 1.00, 95% CI: 1.00-1.00, respectively). The greatest linear discrepancies between the two test conditions were found to be less than 3.5 mm, while the greatest angular discrepancies were below 3.5°. As the effect on accuracy was minimal, these findings support the conjoint use of the Fastrak™ during validation studies of the Spineangel® device. STATEMENT OF RELEVANCE: Although previous studies have used the Fastrak™ as the gold standard measurement system, the influence of an accelerometer driven postural monitor on accuracy has not been reported. The strength of the present study has been to determine the effect of accelerometer placement within the electromagnetic field on the reliability and accuracy of the Fastrak™.

The initial effects of an elbow mobilization with movement technique on grip strength in subjects with lateral epicondylalgia.

This preliminary study indicates the proportion of patients with lateral epicondylalgia that demonstrate a favourable initial response to a manual therapy technique - the mobilization with movement (MWM) for tennis elbow. Twenty-five subjects with lateral epicondylalgia participated. In a one-group pretest - post-test design, we measured (1) pain with active motion, (2) pain-free grip strength and, (3) maximum grip strength before and after a single intervention of MWM. Results of the study indicate that MWM was effective in allowing 92% of subjects to perform previously painful movements pain-free, and improving grip strength immediately afterwards. Significant differences were found between the grip strength of the affected and unaffected limbs prior to the intervention. Both pain-free grip strength and maximum grip strength of the affected limb increased significantly following the intervention. Pain-free grip strength increased by a greater magnitude than maximum grip strength. It can be concluded that MWM is a promising intervention modality for the treatment of patients with Lateral Epicondylalgia. Pain-free grip strength is a more responsive measure of outcome than maximum grip strength for patients with Lateral Epicondylalgia. Further research is warranted to investigate the long-term effectiveness of MWM in the treatment of impairment and disability resulting from Lateral Epicondylalgia.

Mobilization with movement applied to the elbow affects shoulder range of movement in subjects with lateral epicondylalgia.

Clinical observations have suggested a relationship between shoulder range of movement (ROM) and lateral epicondylalgia. This study reports the effect of a single intervention of a mobilization with movement (MWM) applied to the elbow, on shoulder rotation ROM in subjects with lateral epicondylalgia. Twenty-three subjects with lateral epicondylalgia were included. In a one-group pretest-post-test design, ROM of shoulder internal and external rotation were measured by goniometer before and after the application of the MWM, of both the unaffected and the affected limbs. Significant differences in pre-intervention external rotation ROM were found between unaffected and affected shoulders of subjects with lateral epicondylalgia, but no significant difference remained post-intervention. It may be concluded that restriction of shoulder rotation ROM is present in patients with lateral epicondylalgia, probably due to a facilitated level of shoulder rotator muscle tone. Shoulder internal and external rotation ROM increases significantly following MWM to the elbow, in subjects with unilateral lateral epicondylalgia. Surprisingly, these ROM increases are also apparent on the 'unaffected' limb. These findings suggest that the MWM causes a neurophysiologically mediated decrease in resting muscle tone.

Tibialis posterior myofascial tightness as a source of heel pain: diagnosis and treatment.

STUDY DESIGN: We report 2 cases in which a novel tibialis posterior muscle stretch is used to treat heel pain and lower extremity impairment. OBJECTIVES: To explore dysfunction of the tibialis posterior as a source of heel pain. BACKGROUND: Heel pain is a common symptom of orthopaedic dysfunction of the lower extremity. Tibialis posterior tendon dysfunction is well documented in the medical and surgical literature, but its identification in its early or precursive stages has received little attention. METHODS AND MEASURES: An examination and treatment outline, incorporating a novel assessment and stretching technique, is presented. RESULTS: We identified a stage of dysfunction of the tibialis posterior ("Pre-Stage 1") without clinically identifiable tendon pathology. We refer to this as tibialis posterior myofascial tightness (TPMT). CONCLUSION: Tibialis posterior myofascial tightness is a clinical entity that may be differentially diagnosed in cases of heel pain and specifically treated.

Corona destruction: an innovative control technology for VOCs and air toxics.

This paper discusses the work and results to date leading to the demonstration of the corona destruction process at pilot scale. The research effort in corona destruction of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and air toxics has shown significant promise for providing a valuable contribution to critical U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and national goals of reducing the health effects associated with exposures to hazardous air pollutants. The corona destruction technology could be especially useful in future years in helping industry meet the residual risk requirements of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. Since 1988, EPA has conducted research in the area of corona destruction of VOCs and air toxics. EPA's interest in corona destruction of molecular species started with modeling of a point-plane reactor for destroying toxic organic compounds. EPA's goal is to develop a technology capable of controlling low concentration streams at low capital and operating costs. The purpose of this work is to develop an industrial scale corona reactor capable of efficiently and cost-effectively destroying VOCs and air toxics at ambient temperature and pressure. Results show that corona destruction is a promising control technology for many VOC-contaminated air streams, especially at low concentrations. Cost comparisons are presented for corona destruction and conventional control devices, carbon adsorption, catalytic incineration and thermal incineration.