rheumatoid patient
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

73
(FIVE YEARS 3)

H-INDEX

12
(FIVE YEARS 1)

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 265-268
Author(s):  
Daniel Saraiva ◽  
Markus Knupp ◽  
André Sá Rodrigues ◽  
Tiago Mota Gomes ◽  
Xavier Martin Oliva

We present a case of a rheumatoid patient presenting with acute signs of posterior tibial tendon dysfunction (PTTD). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) results were inconclusive regarding the grade of posterior tibial tendon (PTT) tear. We performed posterior tibial tendoscopy, releasing all tendon adherences, and accomplished complete synovectomy. By the end of the procedure, we observed PTT integrity, normal excursion, and mild tendinosis. At 24-month follow-up, the Visual Analog Scale for pain (VAS-Pain) decreased from 9 (preoperatively) to 1. The Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) increased from 16% (preoperatively) to 94%. Clinically, the patient had a symmetric bilateral heel rise test and no pain over the course of the PTT. A standard radiographic assessment demonstrated a normal foot arch and hindfoot alignment. This report illustrates how posterior tibial tendoscopy can simultaneously provide accurate diagnosis and surgically address acute PTTD on a rheumatoid patient, relieving symptoms and improving midterm clinical scores. Level of Evidence V; Therapeutic Studies; Expert Opinion.


2019 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 115-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jesse Wolfe ◽  
Joshua Wolfe ◽  
H. John Visser

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 2473011417S0003
Author(s):  
Devon Nixon ◽  
Richard McKean ◽  
Sandra Klein ◽  
Jeffrey Johnson ◽  
Jeremy J. McCormick

Category: Lesser Toes, Midfoot/Forefoot Introduction/Purpose: Residual pain and recurrent deformity following forefoot surgery can cause significant disability. In patients with rheumatoid arthritis, first metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joint arthrodesis with lesser metatarsal head resection – often referred to as a rheumatoid forefoot reconstruction – has been shown to be a reliable operation for pain relief and deformity correction. Limited data, however, has been published on outcomes of the same forefoot reconstruction operation in the non- rheumatoid patient. Here, we review our experience with this procedure in patients without rheumatoid disease, hypothesizing improved clinical and radiographic outcomes following surgery. Methods: Following chart review and surveying billing codes, we retrospectively identified patients from 2007-2015 without a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis who underwent first MTP arthrodesis with lesser metatarsal head resection (rheumatoid forefoot reconstruction). Phone surveys were then conducted to assess clinical outcomes including pain and satisfaction scores. Preoperative and postoperative radiographs were reviewed for 1, 2 intermetatarsal angle (IMA), hallux valgus angle (HVA), 2nd MTP angle (MTP-2), and lesser MTP alignment (in both sagittal and axial planes). Postoperative radiographs were also assessed for radiographic union. Results: We identified 14 non-rheumatoid patients (16 feet) who underwent forefoot reconstruction – of those, 13 patients (15 feet) were successfully contacted via follow-up phone survey. Mean postoperative follow up was 42.3 (range: 12-76) months from surgery to phone interview. Mean postoperative satisfaction scores were 9.1 (out of 10), and no patients required further surgery after forefoot reconstruction. Pain scores significantly decreased from 6.2 preoperatively to 2.0 postoperatively (P<.001). Radiographic parameters (IMA, HVA, MTP-2, and lesser MTP alignment in the sagittal plane) all improved with surgery (P<.05). All 16 feet achieved union of the first MTP arthrodesis. Conclusion: With decreased pain, high satisfaction rates, and improved radiographic parameters, first MTP arthrodesis coupled with metatarsal head resection (rheumatoid forefoot reconstruction) is a viable surgical option for non-rheumatoid patients who have failed prior attempts at forefoot reconstruction or have chronic forefoot pain with deformity.


2015 ◽  
Vol 05 (02) ◽  
pp. 137-142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Kane ◽  
Justin Stull ◽  
Randall Culp

2015 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 41-46
Author(s):  
Aneta Bac ◽  
Urszula Chrabota ◽  
Paulina Aleksander-Szymanowicz

Abstract Introduction: The article introduces the fundamental principles of the Canadian Model of Occupational Performance and Engagement (CMOP-E) and the Canadian Practice Process Framework (CPPF). Case study: The model specifies and describes the main areas of interest of occupational therapists ‒ the person, the occupation and environment, and mutual relations and interdependencies between these components. It takes into consideration not only the aspect the occupation being performed by the patient, but also the significance of the patient’s involvement in the activity performed. The Canadian model is based on the model of client-centred practice. Summary: Apart from the elaboration on the theoretical principles of the CPPF-based therapeutic process, this paper also presents an example of the practical application of this model involving work with a rheumatoid patient.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document