Posture and Health: Are the Biomechanical Postural Evaluation and the Postural Evaluation Questionnaire Comparable to and Predictive of the Digitized Biometrics Examination?

BACKGROUND: Postural tone alterations are expressions of myofascial and, therefore, of structural, visceral, and emotional disorders. To prevent these disorders, this study proposes a quantitative investigation method which administers a postural evaluation questionnaire and a postural biomechanical evaluation to 100 healthy subjects. METHODS: The reliability of the method is studied by comparing both assessments with digitized biometrics. In addition, 50 subjects undergo the biomechanical evaluation form twice, by four different operators, to study the intraoperative repeatability. RESULTS: The results show a satisfactory overlap between the results obtained with the postural evaluation questionnaire and the postural biomechanical evaluation compared to computerized biometrics. Furthermore, intraoperative repeatability in the use of the biomechanical evaluation form is demonstrated thanks to a minimal margin of error. CONCLUSIONS: This experience suggests the importance of undertaking this path in both the curative and the preventive sphere on a large scale and on different types of people who easily, and even unknowingly, may face dysfunctional syndromes, not only structural and myofascial but also consequently of the entire body's homeostasis.

The Interaction of Caseload and Usage in Determining Outcomes of Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: A Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) are variable and influenced by caseload (UKA/y) and usage (percentage of knee arthroplasty that are UKA), which relates to indications. This meta-analysis assesses the relative importance of these factors. METHODS: MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and Web of Science (ISI) were searched for consecutive series of cemented Phase 3 Oxford medial UKA. The primary outcome was revision rate/100 observed component years (% pa) with subgroup analysis based on caseload and usage. RESULTS: Forty-six studies (12,520 knees) with an annual revision-rate ranging from 0% to 4.35% pa, mean 1.21% pa (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97-1.47), were identified. In series with mean follow-up of 10-years, the revision-rate was 0.63% pa (95% CI, 0.46-0.83), equating to a 94% (95% CI, 92%-95%) 10-year survival. Aseptic loosening, lateral arthritis, bearing dislocation, and unexplained pain were the predominant failure mechanisms with revision for patellofemoral problems and polyethylene wear exceedingly rare. The lowest revision-rates were achieved with caseload >24 UKA/y (0.88% pa; 95% CI, 0.63-1.61) and usage >30% (0.69% pa; 95% CI, 0.50-0.90). Usage was more important than caseload; with high usage (≥20%), the revision-rate was low, whether the caseload was high (>12 UKA/y) or low (≤12 UKA/y; (0.94% pa; 95% CI, 0.69-1.23 and 0.85% pa; 95% CI, 0.65-1.08), respectively); with low usage (<20%), the revision-rate was high, whether the caseload was high or low (1.58% pa; 95% CI, 0.57-3.05 and 1.76% pa; 95% CI, 1.21-2.41, respectively). CONCLUSION: To achieve optimum results, surgeons, whether high or low caseload, should adhere to the recommended indications such that ≥20%, or ideally >30% of their knee arthroplasties are UKA. If they do this, then they can expect to achieve results similar to those of the long-term series, which all had high usage (>20%) and an average 10-year survival of 94%.