Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Clin Orthop Trauma ; 23: 101613, 2021 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34692407

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: We sought to determine how frequently pubic root fracture is incorrectly identified as anterior column fracture by radiologists and describe differences in characteristics and outcomes between injury patterns. METHODS: We identified 155 patients who sustained pelvic or acetabular fractures at a single, level 1 trauma academic institution. Pelvis computed tomography (CT) scans were evaluated to determine whether patients sustained an anterior column fracture or pubic root fracture. Demographic and clinical factors such as mortality, ambulatory status, type of treatment (nonoperative/surgery), and mechanism of energy were assessed. RESULTS: There were a total of 83 patients in the anterior column group and 72 patients in the pubic root cohort. Eighty-five percent of pubic root fractures were read as anterior column fractures by radiologists. A total of 77.8% of pubic root fractures had posterior ring involvement. Patients with true anterior column acetabular fracture were more likely to need surgery (63.86% vs 41.70%, P = 0.01) and be discharged to skilled nursing or inpatient rehabilitation (59.04% vs 40.27%, P = 0.02) compared to patients with pubic root fracture. CONCLUSION: Pubic root fractures are frequently misread as anterior column fractures in radiology reports. Correctly diagnosing pubic root fractures and differentiating them from anterior column acetabular fractures can have significant impact on patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, Therapeutic.

2.
JBJS Rev ; 9(9)2021 09 13.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34516463

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of telehealth programs in the administration of rehabilitation and the monitoring of postoperative progress after joint replacement is not well studied. The purpose of the present study was to systematically review the currently available evidence on the use of smart-device technology and telehealth programs to guide and monitor postoperative rehabilitation following total joint arthroplasty and to assess their impact on outcomes following surgery. METHODS: A literature search of the MEDLINE database was performed using keywords "mobile," "app," "telehealth," "virtual," "arthroplasty," "outcomes," "joint replacement," "web based," "telemedicine," "TKA," "THA," "activity tracker," "fitness tracker," "monitor," "rehab," "online," and "stepcounter" in all possible combinations. All English studies with a level of evidence of I to III that were published from January 1, 2010, to December 19, 2020 were considered for inclusion. Quantitative and qualitative analysis was performed on the data collected. RESULTS: A total of 28 articles meeting the inclusion criteria were identified and reviewed. With regard to objective functional outcome measures, such as strength, range of motion, or results of the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, the virtual physical therapy group had equivalent or slightly superior outcomes compared with in-person physical therapy. There was similar improvement overall in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient satisfaction between virtual and in-person physical therapy. Virtual physical therapy resulted in cost savings ranging from $206 to $4,100 per patient compared with in-person physical therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Telerehabilitation following lower-extremity joint replacement is less expensive compared with in-person physical therapy, with equivalent outcomes and patient satisfaction. Telerehabilitation and electronic health adjuncts can be used to substitute for traditional rehabilitation and augment postoperative care following total joint arthroplasty, respectively. Telerehabilitation that provides outcomes equivalent to in-person physical therapy not only increases convenience for patients but also decreases the cost burden on the health-care system. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.


Assuntos
Artroplastia do Joelho , Telerreabilitação , Artroplastia do Joelho/efeitos adversos , Extremidades , Humanos , Amplitude de Movimento Articular , Tecnologia , Telerreabilitação/métodos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA