Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
1.
Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol ; 23(2): 197-202, 2013 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23412452

RESUMO

Hip resurfacing arthroplasty is a popular method for treating late stage osteoarthritis, especially in young and active patients. Most studies presenting short-term follow-up after hip resurfacing present radiographic or dual clinician-patient-related outcome. These kinds of outcomes are influenced by interpretation of the clinician and do not tell us much about functional outcome from the patients perspective. Today, functional outcome is often measured using patient-reported outcome instruments. We used the patient-reported 'Hip Disability and osteoarthritis Outcome Score' questionnaire, which has good measurement properties, to assess short-term functional outcome in 160 patients (mean follow-up of 2.6 years) after hip resurfacing surgery. Furthermore, we focused on pain, range of motion, subjective improvement and complications. The majority (86.9%) of patients was free of pain after surgery and range of motion improved significantly. Subjective improvement was indicated in 95% of the patients. Mean HOOS in 149 patients was 87.5. In total, there were 11 complications (6%), and deep infections contributed the most (3.4%). In general, short-term follow-up after hip resurfacing in this cohort showed good clinical and patient-reported functional outcome. When assessing the results of medical interventions, a good PRO instrument can give reliable and valuable information from the patients perspective.


Assuntos
Artroplastia de Quadril , Osteoartrite do Quadril/cirurgia , Artralgia/epidemiologia , Artroplastia de Quadril/métodos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Medição da Dor , Amplitude de Movimento Articular , Recuperação de Função Fisiológica , Estudos Retrospectivos , Inquéritos e Questionários , Resultado do Tratamento
2.
Obstet Gynecol ; 111(4): 865-74, 2008 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-18378745

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To estimate success rates for cytogenetic analysis in different tissues after intrauterine fetal death, and study selection criteria and value of cytogenetic testing in determining cause of death. METHODS: Cytogenetic analyses and the value of this test in determining cause by a multidisciplinary panel were studied in 750 fetal deaths. Morphologic abnormalities, small for gestational age (SGA), advanced maternal age (older than 35 years) and maceration were studied as selection criteria. RESULTS: Chromosomal abnormalities were observed in 13% of fetal deaths. Cytogenetic success rates were significantly higher for invasive testing (85%) than for postpartum tissue analysis (28%, P<.001). There were more abnormal chromosomes (38%) in fetal deaths with morphologic abnormalities than in those without (5%, P<.001). This was not observed for SGA (16% compared with 9.2%, P=.22) or for advanced maternal age (16.7% compared with 12.0%, P=.37). The posterior probability of a chromosomal abnormality in the absence of morphologic abnormalities was still 4.6%. Cytogenetic analysis was successful in 35% of severely macerated fetuses. We do not advise using these selection criteria, because the failure rate was high on postpartum tissues. Cytogenetic analysis was valuable in determining the cause in 19% of the fetal deaths. CONCLUSION: Parents should be counseled on aspects of cytogenetic analysis after fetal death. We advise performing nonselective invasive testing after fetal death and before labor for all fetal deaths.


Assuntos
Aberrações Cromossômicas , Análise Citogenética , Morte Fetal/genética , Adulto , Amniocentese , Causas de Morte , Feminino , Humanos , Recém-Nascido , Recém-Nascido Pequeno para a Idade Gestacional , Idade Materna
3.
J Bone Joint Surg Am ; 94 Suppl 1: 24-8, 2012 Jul 18.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22810443

RESUMO

In this article, we discuss the limitations of conventional randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the surgical field. Surgeons are often believers in certain surgical techniques and therefore can be reluctant to learn new interventions. In expertise-based trials, the patients are randomized to surgeons with expertise in the intervention under investigation. In conventional RCTs, patients are randomized to an intervention, and surgeons will perform this intervention regardless of whether this is the surgery they typically undertake. Conventional randomization may lead to surgery performed by a less experienced or less motivated surgeon, resulting in differential expertise bias. Expertise-based trials can overcome these limitations if potential pitfalls are taken into account.


Assuntos
Competência Clínica , Procedimentos Ortopédicos , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto/métodos , Projetos de Pesquisa/tendências , Humanos , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto/tendências
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA