Explore the vast range of titles available.

AimOsteoporotic thoracolumbar fractures are of increasing importance. To identify the optimal treatment strategy this multicentre prospective cohort study was performed.PurposePatients suffering from osteoporotic thoracolumbar fractures were included. Excluded were tumour diseases, infections and limb fractures. Age, sex, trauma mechanism, OF classification, OF-score, treatment strategy, pain condition and mobilization were analysed.MethodsA total of 518 patients’ aged 75 ± 10 (41–97) years were included in 17 centre. A total of 174 patients were treated conservatively, and 344 were treated surgically, of whom 310 (90%) received minimally invasive treatment. An increase in the OF classification was associated with an increase in both the likelihood of surgery and the surgical invasiveness.ResultsFive (3%) complications occurred during conservative treatment, and 46 (13%) occurred in the surgically treated patients. 4 surgical site infections and 2 mechanical failures requested revision surgery. At discharge pain improved significantly from a visual analogue scale score of 7.7 (surgical) and 6.0 (conservative) to a score of 4 in both groups (p < 0.001). Over the course of treatment, mobility improved significantly (p = 0.001), with a significantly stronger (p = 0.007) improvement in the surgically treated patients.ConclusionFracture severity according to the OF classification is significantly correlated with higher surgery rates and higher invasiveness of surgery. The most commonly used surgical strategy was minimally invasive short-segmental hybrid stabilization followed by kyphoplasty/vertebroplasty. Despite the worse clinical conditions of the surgically treated patients both conservative and surgical treatment led to an improved pain situation and mobility during the inpatient stay to nearly the same level for both treatments.

Chronic back pain has a high prevalence, especially in older adults, and seriously affects sufferers’ quality of life. Segmental stabilization exercise (SSE) is often used during physiotherapy to enhance core stability. The execution of SSE requires the selective contraction of deep abdominal and back muscles. Motor learning can be supported using ultrasound imaging as visual biofeedback. ULTRAWEAR is a mobile ultrasound system that provides deep learning-based biofeedback on SSE execution, which is currently under development. We interviewed 15 older chronic back pain patients (CBPPs) to investigate their pain management behavior, experience with SSE, as well as their needs and requirements for ULTRAWEAR. We also gathered information about future-usage scenarios. CBPPs reported a high willingness to use the system as a feedback tool both in physiotherapeutic practices and at home. The automated detection and evaluation of muscle contraction states was highlighted as a major benefit of the system compared to the more subjective feedback provided by traditional methods such as palpation. The system to be developed was perceived as a helpful solution to support learning about SSE.

Background/Objectives: Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is prevalent among older adults and leads to significant functional limitations and reduced quality of life. Segmental stabilization exercises (SSEs) are commonly used to treat CLBP, but the selective activation of deep abdominal muscles during these exercises can be challenging for patients. To support muscle activation, physiotherapists use biofeedback methods such as palpation and ultrasound imaging. This randomized controlled pilot study aimed to compare the effectiveness of these two biofeedback techniques in older adults with CLBP. Methods: A total of 24 participants aged 65 years or older with CLBP were randomly assigned to one of two groups: one group performed self-palpation biofeedback, while the other group used real-time ultrasound imaging to visualize abdominal muscle activation. Muscle activation and thickness were continuously tracked using a semi-automated algorithm. The preferential activation ratio (PAR) was calculated to measure muscle activation, and statistical comparisons between groups were made using ANOVA. Results: Both groups achieved positive PAR values during all repetitions of the abdominal-draw-in maneuver (ADIM) and abdominal bracing (AB). Statistical analysis revealed no significant differences between the groups in terms of PAR during ADIM (F(2, 42) = 0.548, p = 0.58, partial η2 = 0.025) or AB (F(2, 36) = 0.812, p = 0.45, partial η2 = 0.043). Both groups reported high levels of exercise enjoyment and low task load. Conclusions: In conclusion, both palpation and ultrasound biofeedback appear to be effective for guiding older adults with CLBP during SSE. Larger studies are needed to confirm these results and examine the long-term effectiveness of these biofeedback methods.

Background The evidence for the treatment of midthoracic fractures in elderly patients is weak. The aim of this study was to evaluate midterm results after posterior stabilization of unstable midthoracic fractures in the elderly. Methods Retrospectively, all patients aged ≥65 suffering from an acute unstable midthoracic fracture treated with posterior stabilization were included. Trauma mechanism, ASA score, concomitant injuries, ODI score and radiographic loss of reduction were evaluated. Posterior stabilization strategy was divided into short-segmental stabilization and long-segmental stabilization. Results Fifty-nine patients (76.9 ± 6.3 years; 51% female) were included. The fracture was caused by a low-energy trauma mechanism in 22 patients (35.6%). Twenty-one patients died during the follow-up period (35.6%). Remaining patients ( n  = 38) were followed up after a mean of 60 months. Patients who died were significantly older ( p  = 0.01) and had significantly higher ASA scores ( p  = 0.02). Adjacent thoracic cage fractures had no effect on mortality or outcome scores. A total of 12 sequential vertebral fractures occurred (35.3%). The mean ODI at the latest follow up was 31.3 ± 24.7, the mean regional sagittal loss of reduction was 5.1° (± 4.0). Patients treated with long segmental stabilization had a significantly lower rate of sequential vertebral fractures during follow-up ( p  = 0.03). Conclusion Unstable fractures of the midthoracic spine are associated with high rates of thoracic cage injuries. The mortality rate was rather high. The majority of the survivors had minimal to moderate disabilities. Thereby, patients treated with long segmental stabilization had a significantly lower rate of sequential vertebral body fractures during follow-up.

BACKGROUND:This study “Effectiveness of Mckenzie approach and segmental spinal stabilization exercises on neck pain in individuals with cervical postural syndrome: an experimental study” was conducted to study and find the effectiveness of Mckenzie approach and segmental spinal stabilization exercises on reduction of pain, correction of rounded shoulder, and disability. Pain, disability, and rounded shoulders are the major limiting factors as it affects the quality of life and reduces efficiency and social participation.MATERIALS AND METHODS:The study was conducted among 120 individuals with cervical postural syndrome, and fulfilling the inclusion and exclusion criteria was included. The outcome measures were Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Neck Disability Index (NDI), and Vernier caliper to evaluate pain, functional disability, and rounded shoulder, respectively. Subjects were randomly divided into two groups, Group A and Group B, by using SPSS software. Interventional training was given for 6 weeks to the patients. Group A subjects were given spinal stabilization exercises. Group B subjects were given Mckenzie approach. The statistical analysis was performed using SPSS; pre-test and post-test were used to calculate the results, followed by data presentation and analysis.RESULT:The result showed that at the end of the 6 weeks on comparison between pre- and post-intervention of Group A and Group B, both the techniques were effective, but group B was significantly effective than Group A.CONCLUSION:It was noted that McKenzie approach and segmental spinal stabilization exercises were effective on neck pain in individuals with cervical postural syndrome, but on comparing both techniques, Mckenzie protocol is more beneficial than segmental spinal stabilization exercises. The study accepts the alternate hypothesis that there is significant effect of McKenzie approach and segmental spinal stabilization exercises on neck pain in individuals with cervical postural syndrome.

Randomized controlled trial. To contrast the efficacy of two exercise programs-multifidus retraining program (MRP) and traditional back exercises (TBE)-on pain and functional disability in individuals with chronic low back pain. Low back pain is a common musculoskeletal disorder. Mechanical low back pain does not involve nerve roots. Stability of the spine is provided by the ligaments and muscles of the lower back and abdomen. Although weakness of the superficial trunk and abdominal muscles are the primary risk factors, recent studies have demonstrated the involvement of weakness and lack of control of the deep trunk muscles, especially the multifidus and transverse abdominis muscles. Therefore, exercises to restore optimal lumbar multifidus function are important in rehabilitation strategies. Thirty individuals were randomly assigned to receive TBE, where exercises focused on the superficial muscles of abdomen and low back (control, group A) and MRP, where exercises focused on the deep multifidus muscles fibers (experimental, group B). Groups were examined to find the effect of these exercises on visual analog scale rated pain (visual analogical scale) and functional disability assessed by the Oswestry disability questionnaire. The exercise program lasted for 6 weeks on alternate days, with 20 repetitions of each exercise, with each move held for 5-8 seconds. Subjects were evaluated at the start of the study and after completion of the 6-week exercise program. As compared to baseline, both treatments were effective in relieving pain and improving disability (p<0.001). The MRP group had significant gains for pain and functional disability when compared to the TBE group (both p<0.001). Both techniques lessen pain and reduce disability. MRP is superior to TBE in reducing pain and improving function.

Exercise rehabilitation is one of the few evidence-based treatments for chronic non-specific low back pain (cLBP), but individual success is notoriously variable and may depend on the patient’s adherence to the prescribed exercise regime. This prospective study examined factors associated with adherence and the relationship between adherence and outcome after a programme of physiotherapeutic spine stabilisation exercises. A total of 32/37 patients with cLBP completed the study (mean age, 44.0 (SD = 12.3) years; 11/32 (34%) male). Adherence to the 9-week programme was documented as: percent attendance at therapy, percent adherence to daily home exercises (patient diary) and percent commitment to rehabilitation (Sports Injury Rehabilitation Adherence Scale (SIRAS)). The average of these three measures formed a multidimensional adherence index (MAI). Psychological disturbance, fear-avoidance beliefs, catastrophising, exercise self-efficacy and health locus of control were measured by questionnaire; disability in everyday activities was scored with the Roland–Morris disability scale and back pain intensity with a 0–10 graphic rating scale. Overall, adherence to therapy was very good (average MAI score, 85%; median (IQR), 89 (15)%). The only psychological/beliefs variable showing a unique significant association with MAI was exercise self-efficacy (Rho = 0.36, P  = 0.045). Pain intensity and self-rated disability decreased significantly after therapy (each P  < 0.01). Adherence to home exercises showed a moderate, positive correlation with the reduction in average pain (Rho = 0.54, P  = 0.003) and disability (Rho = 0.38, P  = 0.036); higher MAI scores were associated with greater reductions in average pain (Rho = 0.48, P  = 0.008) and a (n.s.) tendency for greater reductions in disability (Rho = 0.32, P  = 0.07) Neither attendance at therapy nor SIRAS were significantly related to any of the outcomes. The benefits of rehabilitation depended to a large extent on the patient’s exercise behaviour outside of the formal physiotherapy sessions. Hence, more effort should be invested in finding ways to improve patients’ motivation to take responsibility for the success of their own therapy, perhaps by increasing exercise self-efficacy. Whether the “adherence–outcome” interaction was mediated by improvements in function related to the specific exercises, or by a more “global” effect of the programme, remains to be examined.

The present paper attempts to clarify the between-subjects variability exhibited in both segmental stabilisation strategies and their subordinated or associated sensory contribution. Previous data have emphasised close relationships between the interindividual variability in both the visual control of posture and the spatial visual perception. In this study, we focused on the possible relationships that might link perceptual visual field dependence-independence and the visual contribution to segmental stabilisation strategies. Visual field dependent (FD) and field independent (FI) subjects were selected on the basis of their extreme score in a static rod and frame test where an estimation of the subjective vertical was required. In the postural test, the subjects stood in the sharpened Romberg position in darkness or under normal or stroboscopic illumination, in front of either a vertical or a tilted frame. Strategies of segmental stabilisation of the head, shoulders and hip in the roll plane were analysed by means of their anchoring index (AI). Our hypothesis was that FD subjects might use mainly visual cues for calibrating not only their spatial perception but also their strategies of segmental stabilisation. In the case of visual cue disturbances, a greater visual dependency to the strategies of segmental stabilisation in FD subjects should be validated by observing more systematic \"en bloc\" functioning (i.e. negative AI) between two adjacent segments. The main results are the following: 1. Strategies of segmental stabilisation differed between both groups and differences were amplified with the deprivation of either total vision and/or static visual cues. 2. In the absence of total vision and/or static visual cues, FD subjects have shown an increased efficiency of the hip stabilisation in space strategy and an \"en bloc\" operation of the shoulder-hip unit (whole trunk). The last \"en bloc\" operation was extended to the whole head-trunk unit in darkness, associated with a hip stabilisation in space. 3. The FI subjects have adopted neither a strategy of segmental stabilisation in space nor on the underlying segment, whatever the body segment considered and the visual condition. Thus, in this group, head, shoulder and hip moved independently from each other during stance control, roughly without taking into account the visual condition. The results, emphasising a differential weighting of sensory input involved in both perceptual and postural control, are discussed in terms of the differential choice and/or ability to select the adequate frame of reference common to both cognitive and motor spatial activities. We assumed that a motor-somesthetics \"neglect\" or a lack of mastering of these inputs/outputs rather than a mere visual dependence in FD subjects would generate these interindividual differences in both spatial perception and postural balance. This proprioceptive \"neglect\" is assumed to lead FD subjects to sensory reweighting, whereas proprioceptive dominance would lead FI subjects to a greater ability in selecting the adequate frame of reference in the case of intersensory disturbances. Finally, this study also provides evidence for a new interpretation of the visual field dependence-independence dimension in both spatial perception and postural control.

OperationszielDynamische intervertebrale Abstützung an der Halswirbelsäule durch Implantation einer modularen künstlichen Bandscheibenprothese mit Endplattenfixation durch zentrale Kielstabilisierung über einen gering invasiven anterolateralen Zugang.IndikationenZervikale ventrale mediane oder mediolaterale Bandscheibenvorfälle, symptomatische „cervical disk disease“ (SCDD) mit ventraler ossärer, ligamentärer und/oder diskogener Einengung des Spinalkanals.KontraindikationenZervikale Frakturen, Tumoren, Osteoporose, arthrogener Nackenschmerz, ausgeprägte Facettendegeneration, erhöhte Segmentinstabilität, Ossifikation des hinteren Längsbandes (OPLL), ausgeprägte Osteopenie, akute und chronische systemische, spinale oder lokale Infektionen, systemische und metabolische Erkrankungen, bekannte Implantatallergie, Schwangerschaft, ausgeprägte Adipositas (Body-Mass-Index > 36 kg/m2), mangelnde Patientencompliance, Alkoholabusus, Medikamentenabhängigkeit, Drogenmissbrauch.OperationstechnikDarstellung der ventralen Halswirbelsäule über einen anterolateralen Zugang. Fixation von Sicherungsschrauben. Intervertebrale Diskektomie. Segmentdistraktion über Distraktionsspreizer. Entknorpelung der Wirbelkörperendplatten. Mikroskopgestützte Dekompression des Spinalkanals. Probeimplantat zur Bestimmung von Implantathöhe und Auflagefläche sowie Mittellinienpositionierung. Nach biplanarer Röntgenkontrolle Fräsen des Kielschnitts über Fräslehre und Fräser, Reinigen des Kielschnitts, radiologische Überprüfung der Tiefe des Kielschnitts mit Positionslehre. Implantation des Originalimplantats unter seitlicher Bildwandlerkontrolle. Entfernung des Insertionsinstrumentariums.WeiterbehandlungFunktionelle Nachbehandlung ohne externe Ruhigstellung, fakultativ weiche Halsorthese postoperativ für 14 Tage.ErgebnisseImplantation von 100 zervikalen Prodisc-C Bandscheibenprothesen bei 78 Patienten (Durchschnittsalter 48 Jahre). Klinische und radiologische Nachuntersuchung 24 Monate postoperativ. Deutliche Verbesserung der Scorewerte von visueller Analogskala und Neck Disability Index. Radiologisch Nachweis einer verbesserten Lordose und Beweglichkeit im Indexsegment. Inzidenz der Spontanfusion operierter Segmente 8,75% ohne wesentliche Relevanz für das klinische Ergebnis.

Objective To compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of single-segment posterior decompression combined with two different non-fusion dynamic stabilization systems, Isobar EVO and Isobar TTL, in the context of facet joint degeneration and segmental mobility. Method A retrospective study was conducted on 47 patients who underwent single-segment surgery at the L4/5 level using either the Isobar EVO ( n  = 23) or Isobar TTL ( n  = 24) systems. We assessed facet joint degeneration on both sides of the fixed (L3/4, L4/5) and superior adjacent (L2/3) segments using the Fujiwara MRI grading system. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analog scale (VAS) for back and leg pain at baseline, 12 months, and 24 months postoperatively. Result Both groups exhibited significant facet joint degeneration at the fixed segments (L3/4 and L4/5) at 24 months. The TTL group also showed significant degeneration at the superior adjacent segment (L2/3), whereas the EVO group did not. Restoration of lumbar lordosis was significantly better in the EVO group. Pain and disability scores improved more in the EVO group than in the TTL group at both 12 and 24 months postoperatively. Conclusion The Isobar EVO system, with its enhanced mobility, may delay facet joint degeneration in the superior adjacent segment compared to the Isobar TTL system. However, both systems result in degeneration at the fixed segment, indicating a need for further improvements to mimic the natural biomechanics of the spine more closely.