In Vivo Kinematics of Functional Ankle Instability Patients and Lateral Ankle Sprain Copers During Stair Descent

Patients with mechanic ankle instability experience increased tibiotalar and subtalar joint laxity. However, in vivo joint kinematics in functional ankle instability (FAI) patients and lateral ankle sprain (LAS) copers, especially during dynamic activities, are poorly understood. Ten FAI patients, 10 LAS copers, and 10 healthy controls were included in this study. A dual fluoroscopic imaging system was used to analyze the tibiotalar and subtalar joint kinematics during stair descent. Five key poses of stair descent were analyzed. Kinematic data from six degrees of freedom were calculated utilizing a solid modeling software. The range of motion and joint positions in each degree of freedom were compared among the three groups. The tibiotalar joints of FAI patients and LAS copers were significantly more inverted than those of healthy controls during the foot strike (p = 0.016, = 0.264). The subtalar joints of FAI patients were significantly more anteriorly translated (pose 2, p = 0.003, = 0.352; pose 3, p < 0.001, = 0.454; pose 4, p = 0.004, = 0.334), inverted (pose 4, p = 0.027, = 0.234; pose 5,p = 0.034, = 0.221), and externally rotated (pose 4, p = 0.037, = 0.217; pose 5; p = 0.004, = 0.331) than those of healthy controls during the mid‐stance and the heel off. The FAI patients showed excessive tibiotalar inversion and subtalar joint hypermobility during stair descent. Meanwhile, the LAS copers maintained subtalar joint stability, and only showed excessive tibiotalar inversion in foot strike. These data provide insight into the mechanisms behind the development of FAI after initial LAS. © 2019 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 37:1860–1867, 2019     

Hypertension is a risk factor for adverse outcomes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019: a cohort study

Abstract

Background

Comorbidities are commonly seen in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but the clinical implication is not yet well-delineated. We aim to characterize the prevalence and clinical implications of comorbidities in patients with COVID-19.     

养阴健脾法临床应用举隅

养阴健脾法系治疗脾阴不足证的一大法则，用于临床常获奇效。现仅援引验案几则介绍如下。     

牙冠延长术在残根残冠修复中的临床疗效

目的评价牙冠延长术在牙体缺损达龈下的残根残冠修复中的临床疗效。方法自2004年5月至2005年6月,对32例患者的36颗牙体缺损达龈下的患牙,术前按断端位于龈下最深距离分为A组(20颗患牙,距离<3.0mm)和B组(16颗患牙,3.0mm≤距离≤4.0mm),均采用牙冠延长术暴露龈下牙体断面,术后6周行桩冠修复。分别记录和比较手术前、后牙周探诊深度(PD)、菌斑指数(PLI)、龈沟出血指数(SBI)和牙齿松动度,以观察临床疗效。结果术后随访患者6个月,两组病例术后6周牙体断端均暴露较好、龈缘颜色正常,术后修复效果有效率为100%,满意率为77.78%。A组术后无松动,修复效果满意;B组术后50.00%出现Ⅰ度松动,修复效果欠佳,两组修复效果比较差异有显著意义(P<0.05)。术后各阶段两组的PD、PLI、SBI均明显优于术前(P<0.05),但两组术后牙周指数比较差异无显著意义(P>0.05)。结论牙冠延长术有利于残根残冠的保存和修复,但要注意适应证的选择。     

负压进针在心血管内科病人中的应用

[目的]探讨负压进针在心血管内科病人的静脉输注中是否优于常规进针法.[方法]将2004年1月-2005年6月我科收治且静脉穿刺难度大的病人随机分为实验组和对照组,实验组150例应用负压进针法,对照组150例应用常规进针法,比较两组的穿刺成功率和回血率.[结果]负压进针法比常规进针法的穿刺成功率提高了12%,回血率提高了13%,两组间穿刺成功率和回血率的差异有统计学意义(P＜0.01).[结论]负压进针大大提高了穿刺成功率和回血率,减少了病人的痛苦,提高护理人员的工作效率和住院病人满意度.     

Comparison of the Emergency Severity Index (ESI) and the Taiwan Triage System in predicting resource utilization.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: The importance of accurate triage in Taiwan is becoming more apparent with the increasing number of emergency department (ED) patients, and resources for the National Health Insurance becoming constrained. This study compared the ability of the Taiwan triage system (TTS) and the standardized 5-level Emergency Severity Index (ESI) triage system to predict ED resource utilization. METHODS: Patients arriving at the ED were triaged by both TTS and by using a two-page checklist of ESI criteria during the 3-month study period. The ESI triage level was calculated independently to avoid bias. Disease category (trauma vs. nontrauma), length of stay (LOS) and hospitalization data were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 3172 patients with both ESI and TWN evaluation were included. The distributions of ESI ratings within TTS level 1 were: ESI 1, 21.1%; ESI 2, 68.1%; ESI 3, 7.4%; ESI 4, 3.4%; ESI 5, 0%. For TTS level 3, they were: ESI 1, 0.1%; ESI 2, 26.2%; ESI 3, 39.5%; ESI 4, 27.5%; ESI 5, 6.8%. Hospitalization rates were 74.5%, 40.9% and 22.2% in TTS levels 1, 2 and 3, respectively; and were 96.2%, 47.0%, 30.9%, 6.7%and 6.6% in ESI levels 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, respectively. TTS triaged more trauma patients as life-threatening/emergent condition than nontrauma patients (68.8% vs. 48.4%, p < 0.001). Triage by ESI, however, showed no significant difference in the percentage of trauma and nontrauma patients with highly acute conditions (44.2% vs. 46.6%, p = 0.230). Patients with ESI level 4 or 5 have significantly shorter ED LOS than those with ESI level 3. CONCLUSION: ESI produces more accurate discriminating patient acuity, ED LOS and hospitalization rate than TTS. Adopting a standardized 5-level triage tool might improve resource utilization planning of ED practice.