scholarly journals Epidemiology of orthopaedic trauma in Istanbul level 3 private hospital

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 1185
Author(s):  
Dursun Karakaş ◽  
Murat Demiroğlu
Keyword(s):  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Private Hospital ◽  
Pelvic Trauma ◽  
Level 3 ◽  
Male Patients ◽  
Vertebral Trauma ◽  
Upper Extremity Trauma ◽  
Extremity Injuries ◽  
Tissue Trauma

Background: The distribution of patients who were admitted to the hospital for trauma depends on the location of hospital and the distribution of the population where the hospital is located. The aim was to answer the question regarding the distribution of orthopaedic traumas which were admitted to the emergency service of level 3 a private hospital and to be able to shed light on necessary training and equipment for the aforementioned emergency departments.Methods: The distribution of the patients who were admitted to level 3 private hospital for a year was analyzed retrospectively. The patients who admitted between January 2014 and January 2015 were divided into subgroups as upper extremity, lower extremity, vertebral disk pathology, vertebral trauma, infection and soft tissue trauma, accompanying thoracic trauma and then they were taken into consideration.Results: A total of 1538 patients admitted during a 12-month period. The number of the patients with upper extremity trauma was 539 while that of lower extremity was 423. There were 365 patients with vertebral trauma which was followed by 94 patients with pelvic trauma. The remaining patient group had thoracic trauma.Conclusions: The patients aged between 30-39 years constituted the majority of the cases in present study. The upper extremity injuries were predominant. Also, the number of male patients was higher in every month. The center where the hospital is located plays an important role in determining the age group and type of trauma.

scholarly journals Peculiarities of Sports Injures of Sprint and Throwing Cohorts in Track and Field Athletics

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (88) ◽  
Author(s):  
Linas Rekus ◽  
Evelina Rekuvienė ◽  
Aušra Burkauskienė ◽  
Daiva Emilija Rekienė ◽  
Žibuoklė Senikienė ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Training Programs ◽  
Body Part ◽  
Track And Field ◽  
Body Parts ◽  
Lower Extremity Injuries ◽  
Extremity Trauma ◽  
Upper Extremity Trauma ◽  
Extremity Injuries

Research background and hypothesis. The severity of recurrence of injuries in track and field athletics gives possibility to adjust training programs for athletes.  Research aim was to analyse which body parts are mostly injured and the severity of recurrence of injuries in track and field athletics gives possibility to adjust training programs for athletes.Research methods. Thirty six athletes were given questionnaires developed using standardized methodology validated by the IOC and implemented by the IAAF during international track and field competitions.Research results. There were 64 cases of injuries among 33 athletes: head and trunk cases – 12 (18.8%), upper extremity – 14 (21.9%), lower extremity – 38 (59.4%). In all cases lower extremity injuries dominated. In sprinters lower extremity injuries dominated and there was no upper extremity trauma. In throwers the upper and the lower extremity were equally vulnerable, mild and very mild injuries were observed. There was no difference between both groups in recurrence of the same trauma.Discussion and conclusions.  Estimating which body parts are mostly injured in sports gives the possibility to  adjust  training  programs  for  athletes,  increasing  the  amount  of  athletic  exercises  intended  for  the  functional preparation of those parts.  Injuries in track and field are frequent and dominating injuries are of lower extremity; there exist the possibility of recurrence of the injury in the same body part. Injuries prevalent in sprinter cohort are of lower extremities, and injuries prevalent in throwing cohort are of lower and upper extremities.Keywords: physiotherapy, Parkinson’s disease, reaction time.

scholarly journals ORTHOPEDIC INJURIES IN ADOLESCENT GYMNASTS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (7_suppl3) ◽  
pp. 2325967121S0011
Author(s):  
Katie Kim ◽  
Michael Saper
Keyword(s):  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Weight Bearing ◽  
The Body ◽  
Adolescent And Young Adult ◽  
Body Region ◽  
Lower Extremity Injuries ◽  
Common Location ◽  
Orthopedic Injuries ◽  
Extremity Injuries

Background: Gymnastics exposes the body to many different types of stressors ranging from repetitive motion, high impact loading, extreme weight bearing, and hyperextension. These stressors predispose the spine and upper and lower extremities to injury. In fact, among female sports, gymnastics has the highest rate of injury each year. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to systematically review the literature on location and types of orthopedic injuries in adolescent (≤20 years) gymnasts. Methods: The Pubmed, Medline, EMBASE, EBSCO (CINAHL) and Web of Science databases were systematically searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to identify all studies reporting orthopedic injuries in adolescent and young adult gymnasts. All aspects of injuries were extracted and analyzed including location, type and rates of orthopedic injuries. Results: Screening yielded 22 eligible studies with a total of 427,225 patients. Twenty of 22 studies reported upper extremity injuries of which four specifically focused on wrist injuries. Eight studies reported lower extremity injuries. Nine studies reported back/spinal injuries. Seven studies investigated each body location of injury; one study reported the upper extremity as the most common location for injury and six studies reported the lower extremity as the most common location for injury. Of those seven studies, five (23%) reported sprains and strains as the most common injury. One study reported fractures as the most common injury. Conclusion: There is considerable variation in reported injury location. Some studies focused specifically on the spine/back or wrist. The type of gymnastics each patient participated in was also different, contributing to which area of the body was more heavily stressed, or lacking. Current literature lacks data to fully provide evidence regarding which body region is more frequently injured and the type of injury sustained.

Prediction Rules for Selective Radiographic Assessment of Extremity Injuries in Children and Adolescents

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1990 ◽  
Vol 86 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-57
Author(s):  
Kenneth M. McConnochie ◽  
Klaus J. Roghmann ◽  
Joel Pasternack ◽  
David J. Monroe ◽  
Liberatore P. Monaco
Keyword(s):  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Children And Adolescents ◽  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Logit Analysis ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Prediction Rules ◽  
Lower Extremity Injuries ◽  
Extremity Injuries ◽  
Point Tenderness

To assess the potential for selective use of roentgenography in evaluating extremity injuries, prediction rules were developed based on prospective observations for 617 injured children and adolescents examined in our Emergency Department (phase 1) and tested on 601 examined 1 year later (phase 2). Logit analysis produced best-fitting statistical models for phase 1 data with significant (P < 0.05) direct effects of gross signs, point tenderness, activity not routine, swelling moderate or severe, time from injury <6 hours, and pain with motion for upper extremity injuries; and, for lower extremity injuries, not knee injury, activity not routine, point tenderness, and foot injury. Prediction rules developed in phase 1 performed equally well when tested on phase 2 injuries. Data from both phases were combined, therefore, in analysis that produced risk estimates. For all injury types (ie, for injuries with all possible combinations of presence or absence of these findings), risk for fracture was derived. For upper extremity injuries, with a threshold risk for fracture of 20% used to select specific injury types for roentgenography, prediction rule outcomes were 18.1% of roentgenograms avoided and 5.3% of fractures missed. For lower extremity injuries, using a threshold risk of 10% to select injury types for roentgenography, outcomes were 25.8% of roentgenograms avoided and 5.3% of fractures missed. Alternative prediction rules allowed still greater roentgenogram avoidance, although missed fractures also increased. Risk of adverse functional outcome from missed fractures appeared small. Annual national cost savings from the elimination of 18.1% of upper and 25.8% of lower extremity roentgenographic evaluations was estimated at $103 million.

scholarly journals FEATURES OF SPORTS PERFORMANCE RELATED INJURIES OF ELITE TRACK AND FIELD ATHLETES IN LITHUANIA

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (103) ◽  
pp. 24-31
Author(s):  
Linas Rekus ◽  
Lina Simaškaitė ◽  
Egidijus Šakalys
Keyword(s):  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Sports Medicine ◽  
Sports Injuries ◽  
Track And Field ◽  
Significance Level ◽  
Lower Extremity Injuries ◽  
Huge Impact ◽  
One Year ◽  
Extremity Injuries

Background. Sports injuries have a huge impact on performance of athletes in competitions. A lot of athletes do not obtain full recovery after injuries, which leads to trauma recurrence or higher severity injuries. Being aware of dominating anatomical regions and frequencies of occurrence of these traumas could help to prevent it and to protect athletes’ health. Methods. In 2013 Lithuanian professional athletes were asked to fill in questionnaires developed by using standardized methodology validated by the IOC and implemented by the IAAF during international track and field competitions. Data were collected, processed and analysed. Results were obtained using statistical methods, significance level of p ≤ .05 was considered statistically significant. Results. We investigated 33 athletes- sprinters and throwers (javelin and discus throwers, shot putters). They had 57 cases of traumatic injuries in one year period (2012–2013). Results of the study showed that injuries of lower extremity statistically significantly dominated comparing with upper extremity and head/trunk in both fields of sport. Injuries by anatomical region were: lower extremity – 67%, upper extremity – 12%, head and trunk – 21%. Most of all were injured: hamstrings 23%, inguinal 10.5%, lumbar 13% area. Comparing traumas between throwers and sprinters groups lower extremity injuries statistically significantly dominated in sprinters group, while upper extremity had been injured only in the throwers’ group. Analysing severity of the injuries we noticed that moderate and mild injuries were dominating. Mild and moderate severity injuries appeared leading to a higher risk of re-injury than high severity traumas. Recurrence of the same injury was noticed only in the group of sprinters – 57.9% of sprinters repeatedly suffered mostly from hamstring and inguinal traumas. Conclusions. According to the results of this study, sports medicine physicians could predict potential localization and recurrence of injuries and collaborating with coaches and athletes prepare opportune training programs to avoid harm.

scholarly journals Epidemiology of Figure Skating Injuries: A Review of the Literature

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 532-537 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie S. Han ◽  
Ellen T. Geminiani ◽  
Lyle J. Micheli
Keyword(s):  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Overuse Injury ◽  
Overuse Injuries ◽  
Similar Proportion ◽  
Figure Skating ◽  
Ankle Sprains ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Acute Injuries ◽  
Extremity Injuries

Context: As the popularity and technical demands of figure skating increase, so will the number of athletes presenting with sport-related problems. Evidence Acquisition: Searches were performed across PubMed from 1980 to 2017. The keywords searched were skating, skaters, incidence, and injuries. The search was limited to English-language articles and human participants. Relevant articles were cross-referenced. Study Design: Clinical review. Level of Evidence: Level 5. Results: Previous studies suggest an increase in incidence of figure skating injuries from 1982 to 2003. When combining all disciplines of figure skating, there is a similar proportion of acute and overuse injuries. Within disciplines, overuse injuries appear to be more common in singles skating, while acute injuries are more common in pairs skating, ice dancing, and synchronized skating. Lower extremity injuries are more common than upper extremity injuries in all disciplines, and pairs skating accounts for the majority of upper extremity injuries. Ankle sprains are the most common skating injury, and patellar tendinitis is the most common overuse injury across all disciplines. Stress fractures are the most common overuse injury in female singles skaters. Conclusion: The predominance of overuse injuries in singles disciplines reflects their increasing technical difficulty, with more difficult jumps and longer training hours. Partner disciplines are more likely to involve acute injuries and upper extremity injuries due to high-risk throws and lifts. Emphasis should be placed on properly fitting skating boots, intrinsic foot and ankle strengthening, and lower extremity flexibility, which may prevent many of the common lower extremity and back injuries in figure skating.

scholarly journals Retrospective analysis of injury trends in recreational skiers and snowboarders in Erciyes Ski Centre

2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (6) ◽  
pp. 313-319
Author(s):  
G. Özen ◽  
E. Yilmaz ◽  
H. Koç ◽  
C. Akalan
Keyword(s):  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Injury Surveillance System ◽  
Lower Extremity Injuries ◽  
System A ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Body Location ◽  
Spss Software ◽  
Alpine Skiers ◽  
Extremity Injuries

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to investigate the important differences in overall rates and frequency of injury cases and injury characteristics between the recreational alpine skiers and snowboarders in Erciyes Ski Centre. Methods: The data for this research was obtained from the Erciyes Ski Centre Injury Surveillance System. A total of 834 injury cases that ski patrols registered injury cases caused by recreational alpine skiing and snowboarding during the 2002 to 2017 winter seasons were respectively examined. The injury cases were grouped according to the skiing disciplines. All data were analysed using SPSS software. Results: Injury cases were 690 skiers (82.7%) and 144 snowboarders (17.3%). 397 (57.5%) male and 293 (42.5%) female were skiers and 91 (63.2%) male and 53 (36.8%) female were snowboarders. There was no statistically significant difference between the gender ratios in skiers and snowboarders (p > .05). Data analysis indicated that there were statistically significant differences in the ratios of lower and upper extremity injuries between skiers and snowboarders ( p < .05 ). Skiers suffered more lower extremity injuries while snowboarders suffered more upper extremity injuries ( p < .05 ). Contusion was the most common injuries type in both skiers and snowboarders ( p < .05) . Conclusions: The lower extremity injuries in skiers and the upper extremity injuries in snowboarders were more common with respect to body location of injuries. For both the recreational activities, contusion was the most common injury type.

Combining Values

2002 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-4, 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher R. Brigham
Keyword(s):  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Evaluation Method ◽  
Proximal Phalanx ◽  
Common Error ◽  
The Third ◽  
Whole Person ◽  
Impairment Ratings ◽  
Upper Extremity Impairment ◽  
The Individual

Abstract To account for the effects of multiple impairments, evaluating physicians must provide a summary value that combines multiple impairments so the whole person impairment is equal to or less than the sum of all the individual impairment values. A common error is to add values that should be combined and typically results in an inflated rating. The Combined Values Chart in the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, Fifth Edition, includes instructions that guide physicians about combining impairment ratings. For example, impairment values within a region generally are combined and converted to a whole person permanent impairment before combination with the results from other regions (exceptions include certain impairments of the spine and extremities). When they combine three or more values, physicians should select and combine the two lowest values; this value is combined with the third value to yield the total value. Upper extremity impairment ratings are combined based on the principle that a second and each succeeding impairment applies not to the whole unit (eg, whole finger) but only to the part that remains (eg, proximal phalanx). Physicians who combine lower extremity impairments usually use only one evaluation method, but, if more than one method is used, the physician should use the Combined Values Chart.

Spinal Impairment Evaluation: Fifth Edition Changes

2001 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-3
Author(s):  
Robert H. Haralson
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Spinal Cord Injuries ◽  
Clinical Findings ◽  
Fourth Edition ◽  
Treatment Results ◽  
Standard Terminology ◽  
Made In

Abstract The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Fifth Edition, was published in November 2000 and contains major changes from its predecessor. In the Fourth Edition, all musculoskeletal evaluation and rating was described in a single chapter. In the Fifth Edition, this information has been divided into three separate chapters: Upper Extremity (13), Lower Extremity (14), and Spine (15). This article discusses changes in the spine chapter. The Models for rating spinal impairment now are called Methods. The AMA Guides, Fifth Edition, has reverted to standard terminology for spinal regions in the Diagnosis-related estimates (DRE) Method, and both it and the Range of Motion (ROM) Method now reference cervical, thoracic, and lumbar. Also, the language requiring the use of the DRE, rather than the ROM Method has been strengthened. The biggest change in the DRE Method is that evaluation should include the treatment results. Unfortunately, the Fourth Edition's philosophy regarding when and how to rate impairment using the DRE Model led to a number of problems, including the same rating of all patients with radiculopathy despite some true differences in outcomes. The term differentiator was abandoned and replaced with clinical findings. Significant changes were made in evaluation of patients with spinal cord injuries, and evaluators should become familiar with these and other changes in the Fifth Edition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document