- Browse by Subject
Browsing by Subject "Orthopedics"
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Antiremodeling Agents Influence Osteoblast Activity Differently in Modeling and Remodeling Sites of Canine Rib(Calcified Tissue International, 2006-10-10) Allen, Matthew R.; Follet, Helene; Khurana, M.; Sato, M.; Burr, David B.; Department of Anatomy & Cell Biology, IU School of MedicineAntiremodeling agents reduce bone loss in part through direct actions on osteoclasts. Their effects on osteoblasts and bone formation activity are less clear and may differ at sites undergoing modeling vs. remodeling. Skeletally mature intact beagles, 1–2 years old at the start of the study, were treated daily with clinically relevant doses of alendronate (0.10 or 0.20 mg/kg), risedronate (0.05 or 0.10 mg/kg), raloxifene (0.50 mg/kg), or vehicle (1 mL/kg). Dynamic bone formation parameters were histologically assessed on periosteal, endocortical/trabecular, and intracortical bone envelopes of the rib. Raloxifene significantly increased periosteal surface mineral apposition rate (MAR), a measure of osteoblast activity, compared to all other treatments (+108 to +175%, P < 0.02), while having no significant effect on MAR at either the endocortical/trabecular or intracortical envelope. Alendronate (both 0.10 and 0.20 doses) and risedronate (only the 0.10 dose) significantly (P ≤ 0.05) suppressed MAR on the endocortical/trabecular envelope, while none of the bisphosphonate doses significantly altered MAR at either the periosteal or intracortical envelopes compared to vehicle. Based on these results, we conclude that (1) at clinically relevant doses the two classes of antiremodeling agents, bisphosphonates and selective estrogen receptor modulators, exert differential effects on osteoblast activity in the canine rib and (2) this effect depends on whether modeling or remodeling is the predominant mechanism of bone formation.Item Efficacy of Novel Bracing for Treating Sciatica and Cadaveric Dissection to Examine Excursion of the Sciatic Nerve(2023-07-28) Callahan, Kyle; Dellacqua, DaleBackground/Objective: Sciatica affects nearly half of all Americans and can often become debilitating, leading to severe pain that can limit performing activities of daily living. Brace application has not been tried for alleviation of pain. In this study, we seek to find if a novel brace can decrease pain and decrease bothersome level of symptoms for those suffering from sciatica. In addition, this study utilizes a cadaveric dissection to understand how the sciatic nerve stretches and tensions upon lower limb manipulation. Methods: Fourteen patients self-reported pain, functionality, and bothersome levels pre- and post-bracing. Excel’s data analysis tool was utilized to run statistical tests. One cadaver (2 lower limbs) was dissected, revealing the sciatic nerve at the hip and knee, while tibial nerve at the ankle. Excursion was measured utilizing a fixed pin and an initial distance, the leg manipulated, and final distance from pin measured. Ultimately, excursion was deemed final distance minus initial distance from the pin. Results: The brace decreases Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores, increases Patient Reported Outcomes, and decreases Sciatica Bothersome Indexes. There was a significant difference in VAS pre- versus post-brace values at initial and 7-day post-visit but not at 21- or 42-day post-visit. Sciatic nerve excursion was greatest at the ankle. Discussion/Conclusion Brace use decreases pain levels, increases functionality, and decreases bothersome level of symptoms. The distal nerve moves more upon manipulation and therefore is more prone to tensioning than the proximal nerve. Dissection data illustrates how the brace positions the limb in a way that promotes “detensioning” of the nerve, alleviating sciatica. More cadaver data is needed. Presentation recording available online: https://purl.dlib.indiana.edu/iudl/media/c58059kh24Item MSK PoCUS Training for Rural Clinics(2024-04-26) Smeltzer, Kathryn; Tollar, Roarke; Cook, Myanna; Wilcox, James; Ireland, EllenINTRODUCTION: Point of care ultrasound (PoCUS) is a portable diagnostic technology with broad applicability, no radiation, and is less expensive than alternative imaging methods. PoCUS is emerging as high utility technology to expand bedside physical exams for primary care practitioners. Access to medical care in rural areas is an ongoing issue, especially for specialty care. By using PoCUS, rural providers may be able to more completely screen for conditions and determine if patients will need to seek specialty care, such as orthopedic intervention, which is often more time consuming for rural patients. OBJECTIVES: This study is to identify barriers to learning and using point of care ultrasound technology for rural primary care practitioners for expanded examination, including for orthopedic applications. The secondary objective of this pilot study is to evaluate the best practices of expanding rural PoCUS training. METHODS: The team identified six rural primary care practitioners at outpatient clinics around Indiana. Grant funding was used to equip these clinics with portable ultrasound probes with PoCUS-software-equipped iPads. Training consisted of approximately one hour of independent didactic material and two hours of in-person hands-on training with our investigators and students. Initial surveys were collected before and after the in-person training session. After a few months of individual practice, teleguidence training sessions were offered to the participants. Post-training surveys will be collected approximately six months after the initial training session. At this time, the first and second surveys for the six physicians have been analyzed and provide preliminary results. RESULTS: The pre-training survey from the six physicians before the in-person training session found that previous PoCUS experience of these physicians varies greatly, and nearly all of these practitioners have not used ultrasound in their clinic within the last year. This survey also showed unanimously that these physicians make orthopedic diagnoses in their practice but do not feel comfortable using ultrasound in supporting these diagnoses, showing the potential for PoCUS in their clinical practice. The second survey results have shown that even after just two hours of training, the physicians are comfortable with using ultrasound to support their orthopedic diagnoses, to the point that the majority are also somewhat comfortable teaching this material to others. All of the physicians agreed that the independent didactic material supplemented the in-person training, which supports both the quality and platforms provided for this material. The enthusiasm and improved confidence after the training sessions also support the quality of our investigators’ in-person training sessions. Though it was not difficult to recruit physician participants, one of the biggest obstacles this study faced was scheduling the in-person training session. CONCLUSION: Implementation of PoCUS in rural clinics for the evaluation of orthopedic diagnosis was met with enthusiasm and has shown potential for streamlining evaluation at specialty clinics. Major barriers to adopting this technology include finding adequate time for medical practitioners to learn and practice using the equipment and scheduling live, on-going training.