ABSTRACT
Introduction: Treatment of heterotopic ossification (HO) of the elbow is challenging and fraught with complications. Patients who sustain direct trauma to the elbow joint, the central nervous system, and thermal burns are at increased risk for development of HO. There is a paucity of studies and reports on patient’s self-evaluation after the excision of the heterotopic ossification. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study assessed outcomes after excision of heterotopic ossification around the elbow in a cohort of ten patients operated from 2012 to 2015. The outcome assessment was done by the Mayo Elbow Performance index (MEPI) and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons-Elbow score (ASES-E scores). Results: The mean follow-up was 18.11 months after the operation. The Mayo Elbow Performance Score was excellent in two elbows, good in six and fair in two. The mean gain in flexion-extension arc after excision of HO was 80 degrees. All of the patients had residual flexion deformity postoperatively. Eight of the nine patients were able to do activities requiring flexion at final follow-up. Conclusion: Excision of HO around the elbow is associated with satisfactory patient-rated outcomes in spite of failure to regain full range of motion.
ABSTRACT
Background. Student-centred learning (SCL) places the student at the centre of policies, practices and decision-making in the teaching–learning process. SCL methodology also advocates active involvement of students in the curriculum planning, selection of teaching–learning methods and assessment process. We planned an education innovation project to assess the perception of fifth semester undergraduate medical students towards implementation of an SCL methodology. Methods. The study was done among 87 fifth semester undergraduate medical students (batch of 2010–11) in the noncommunicable disease epidemiology section of Community Medicine at the Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puducherry. The students divided themselves into seven groups and developed the learning objectives, selected teaching–learning methods and assessment process for each session. The facilitators had 3–5 rounds of interaction with each group before the session. Qualitative analysis of feedback collected from students and external faculty after each session was done. The effect of implementing the SCL methodology was assessed by the reaction level of Kirkpatrick’s training evaluation model by using a rating scale. Results. Of the 87 eligible students, 73 (83.9%) returned the forms for evaluation. All seven groups were able to formulate the learning objectives. Most of the groups had used PowerPoint slides and videos as a teaching–learning tool. Innovative assessment methods such as crosswords and ‘chocopati’ were used by some groups. In general, the perception of students was favourable towards SCL compared to conventional methods and they felt that this methodology should be adopted more often. Time management and organization of sessions were the main problems encountered by the students. The mean (SD) score for the items ‘sessions were useful’, ‘sessions were enjoyable’ and ‘sessions improved my knowledge’ were 6.2 (1.8), 7.1 (1.8) and 6.3 (1.9), respectively. Conclusion. The majority of students found the sessions on innovative teaching–learning and assessment techniques enjoyable, useful and informative. The sessions showed that students took an active part in curriculum planning, execution and evaluation.