Clinical orthopaedics and related research
-
Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. · Dec 2014
Randomized Controlled TrialBotulinum toxin a does not decrease calf pain or improve ROM during limb lengthening: a randomized trial.
During lower limb lengthening, distraction-induced muscle pain and surrounding joint contractures are frustrating complications for which few effective treatments are available. ⋯ Level II, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
-
Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. · Dec 2014
Safe zone for superolateral entry pin into the distal humerus in children: an MRI analysis.
The radial nerve is at risk for iatrogenic injury during placement of pins, screws, or wires around the distal humerus. Unlike adults, detailed anatomic information about the relationship of the nerve to the distal humerus is lacking in children. ⋯ Our data suggest that percutaneous direct lateral entry Kirschner wires and half-pins can be safely inserted in the distal humerus in children along the transepicondylar axis, either at or slightly posterior to the lateral supracondylar ridge, when placed caudal to the point located where the lateral supracondylar ridge line diverges from the proximal extent of the supracondylar ridge on AP elbow radiograph.
-
Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. · Dec 2014
Comparative StudyComplications of the Intramedullary Skeletal Kinetic Distractor (ISKD) in distraction osteogenesis.
The Intramedullary Skeletal Kinetic Distractor (ISKD) (Orthofix Inc, Lewisville, TX, USA) is an intramedullary device designed for more comfortable limb lengthening than that with external fixators; lengthening is achieved with this nail using rotational oscillation between two telescoping sections. However, the degree to which this device achieves this goal and its complication rate have not been fully documented. ⋯ Level IV, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
-
Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. · Dec 2014
An analysis of references used for the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination: what are their levels of evidence and journal impact factors?
Although the references recommended for the Orthopaedic In-Training Examination (OITE) have been evaluated in certain subspecialty domains, suggested reference level of evidence (LOE), impact factor, and citation age have not been evaluated comprehensively to our knowledge. ⋯ Our data show that the majority of the recommended readings for the OITE stem from higher impact general orthopaedic and major subspecialty journals. Furthermore the observed mean LOE of the recommended readings shows a preponderance of Levels IV and V research. These data may suggest that test-takers may find benefit in the review of high-level general orthopaedic journals, and review articles in particular while preparing for the OITE, although further study is necessary to determine optimal test preparation strategies. Finally, our study provides a baseline analysis of the study designs of OITE recommended references, and may provide insight for educators designing resident educational curricula.