RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: At least 760,000 outpatient meniscectomies are performed in the United States each year, making this the most common musculoskeletal procedure. However, meniscal resection can alter the joint biomechanics and overload the articular cartilage, which may contribute to degenerative changes and the need for knee replacement. Avoiding or delaying knee replacement is particularly important in younger or more active patients. Synthetic meniscal implants have been developed in an attempt to restore the natural joint biomechanics, alleviate pain and disability, and potentially minimize degenerative changes in patients who require meniscectomy. PURPOSE: To evaluate the preliminary results from 2 ongoing trials that are evaluating the safety and effectiveness of a synthetic polymer meniscal implant (NUsurface; Active Implants, LLC). STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: This was a preliminary analysis of the first 100 patients enrolled across 2 studies for 12 months: a single-arm, intervention-only study and a randomized controlled trial comparing the investigational meniscal implant with nonsurgical therapy. There were 65 patients in the implant group (30 randomized) and 35 in the control group. Outcomes included Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and adverse events (AEs) collected at baseline and follow-up visits of 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were found in baseline characteristics between the implant and control groups. At 12 months, follow-up KOOS data were available for 87% of the 100 included patients. Significantly greater improvements from baseline were observed in the implant group compared with controls in all KOOS subcomponents, except for symptoms (119%-177% greater improvement at 12 months). AEs were reported at similar rates between the 2 groups, with 12 AEs among 11 patients in the implant group (16.9%) versus 5 AEs among 5 patients (14.3%) in the control group (P = .99). CONCLUSION: These preliminary results suggest significant improvements in pain and function scores with the implant over nonsurgical therapy and a similar adverse event rate.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Injury surveillance systems have been implemented at world championships, yet no previous work has determined the burden of injuries during the United States Track and Field Olympic Trials. Additionally, the type of medical service providers utilized throughout the meet has not been reported, leaving it unclear whether optimal staffing needs are being met. PURPOSE: To describe the incidence of injuries presenting to the medical team at the 2016 US Track and Field Olympic Trials (Eugene, Oregon) by event type and competitor demographics. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive epidemiology study. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of all documented injuries and treatments recorded from June 28 through July 10, 2016. Descriptive statistics and the prevalence of newly incurred injuries were calculated for registered athletes and nonathlete (ie, support) staff. The incidence of acute injuries was analyzed for registered athletes, as stratified by athlete sex and event type. RESULTS: A total of 514 individuals were seen during the trials: 89% were athletes and 11% were supporting staff. Physicians treated 71 injuries and 14 illnesses. Of diagnosed injuries, 85% (n = 60) occurred among athletes, with hamstring strains (16.7%, n = 10) being the most prevalent. A mean of 124 medical services (median, 137; interquartile range, 65.5-179.5) were provided each day of the trials. Among medical services, 41.8% were attributed to massage therapists for athletes, while chiropractic services were the most utilized service (47.1%) by the support staff. There was an overall incidence of 59.7 injuries per 1000 registered athletes, with jumpers (109.4 per 1000) and long-distance athletes (90.4 per 1000) being the most commonly seen athletes. CONCLUSION: Throughout the trials, athletes participating in jumping and long-distance events were the most commonly seen by physicians, creating the potential need for an increase in staffing of physicians during meet periods when these events occur. The provided medical services appeared to follow the number of athletes competing during the trials and the need for recovery treatments after competition. Findings from this study should inform future strategy for staffing and policy development at Olympic Trials and other elite-level track and field events in the United States.