Ultrasound-guided dry needling with percutaneous paratenon decompression for chronic Achilles tendinopathy.

PURPOSE: Chronic Achilles tendinopathy is a common overuse injury. There are several modalities of treatment, reflecting difficulties in management. In particular, due to the well-recognised surgical morbidity, treatment has steered towards less invasive routes. Previous studies have targeted pathology either inside or outside the tendon in isolation with varying results. This study aimed to target both pathological sites by combining dry needling with percutaneous hydrostatic decompression as a novel treatment. METHODS: Twenty-one patients with 26 chronic, non-insertional Achilles tendinopathy were prospectively enrolled. Ultrasound-guided dry needling of neovascular areas and small-volume hydrostatic paratenon decompression was performed 6-weekly. Sonographic assessment of tendon thickness and neovascularity was undertaken. Following treatment, a standardised physiotherapy regime was adopted. Visual analogue scores (VAS) were used as the primary outcome measure. Telephonic interviews were carried out 12 and 24 months post-treatment. RESULTS: Twenty-four tendons (in 19 patients) were successfully treated. The mean treatment session was 2. There was no significant change in neovascularity or tendon thickness. Therapeutic intervention led to a significant improvement in VAS at rest (42.4 ± 24.4 vs. 18.4 ± 26.0, p = 0.0005) and during activity (72.8 ± 16.0 vs. 33.7 ± 23.2, p < 0.0001). At 12 and 24 months, >75 % of patients were highly satisfied with their outcome with nearly half reporting complete resolution of their symptoms. >85 % were also able to return to their sporting interests. CONCLUSION: Combined therapy of dry needling with percutaneous hydrostatic paratenon decompression under ultrasound guidance is a well-tolerated procedure with good short- and long-term pain and functional outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prospective case series, Level IV.

The use of abbreviations in medical records in a multidisciplinary world--an imminent disaster.

Abbreviations are commonly used in the medical world to save time and space whilst writing in the patients' medical records. As various specialties have evolved, each has developed a collection of commonly used abbreviations within its practice, which may not be recognizable to those not working within the same field. The purpose of this study was to assess whether we, the multidisciplinary team members, correctly interpret the abbreviations used in the medical records. We analysed one week of orthopaedic surgical medical records for the use of abbreviations and assessed their appreciation by other members of the multidisciplinary team by means of a standardized questionnaire. We found great variability in the understanding of these abbreviations by different groups of health care professionals. As expected, the orthopaedic surgeons produced significantly more right answers when compared to the other groups, but even they could correctly interpret just over half (57.24 per cent) of the abbreviations. There were many misinterpretations of the abbreviations across the specialties posing imminent clinical risk. Whilst abbreviations may indeed save time, the observed inter-group variation in correct interpretation of these abbreviations is unacceptable. We recommend that the abbreviations have no place in the multidisciplinary world and their continued use will only lead to eventual clinical error.