Factors Influencing Mobility During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Community-Dwelling Older Adults.

OBJECTIVE: To describe and identify factors influencing mobility among older adults during the first 5 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: A cross-sectional telesurvey. SETTING: Community dwelling older adults, situated within the first 5 months of the COVID-19 pandemic, in Hamilton, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: A random sample of 2343 older adults were approached to be in the study, of which 247 completed the survey (N=247). Eligible participants were aged ≥65 years. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mobility was measured using global rating of change items and the Late Life Function Instrument (LLFI). Multivariate linear regression models were used to examine the association between mobility and related factors based on Webber's model. RESULTS: 247 older adults (29% male, mean age 78±7.3 years) completed surveys between May and August 2020. Respectively, 26%, 10%, and 9%, rated their ability to engage in physical activity, housework, and move around their home as worse compared with the start of the pandemic. The mean LLFI score was 60.9±13.4. In the model, walking volume (ß=0.03 95% confidence interval 0.013, 0.047), fall history (ß=-0.04, 95% confidence interval -0.08, -0.04), male sex (ß=0.06, 95% confidence interval 0.02, 0.09), unpleasant neighborhood (ß=-0.06, 95% confidence interval -0.11, -0.02), musculoskeletal pain (ß=-0.07, 95% confidence interval -0.11, -0.03), and self-reported health (ß=0.08, 95% confidence interval 0.03, 0.13) had the strongest associations with LLFI scores and explained 64% of the variance in the LLFI score. CONCLUSIONS: Physical and environmental factors may help explain poorer mobility during lockdowns. Future research should examine these associations longitudinally to see if factors remain consistent over time and could be targeted for rehabilitation.

Limiting the Risk of Osteoarthritis After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury: Are Health Care Providers Missing the Opportunity to Intervene?

OBJECTIVE: To understand what sports orthopedic surgeons (OS), primary care physicians (PCPs) with sports medicine training, and physical therapists (PTs) managing nonelite athletes with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury tell their patients about their osteoarthritis (OA) risk. METHODS: An electronic survey was distributed by the Canadian Academy of Sport and Exercise Medicine (PCPs, OS), the Sports and Orthopedic Divisions of the Canadian Physiotherapy Association (PTs), and to OS identified through the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons and the Canadian Orthopaedic Association. The survey included 4 sections: demographics, factors discussed, timing of discussions, and discussion of risk factors and their management. Proportions or means with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 501 health care professionals (HCPs) responded (98 PCPs, 263 PTs, and 140 OS). Of those responding, 70-77% of physicians reported always discussing OA risk, but only 35% of PTs did. All HCPs reported that patient activities perceived as detrimental to knee health, ACL reinjury, and simultaneous injury to other structures in the knee were most often the reason for discussing OA risk. OA risk was discussed at initial management post-injury (65-94%), with few discussing risk subsequently. Eighty percent of physicians and 99% of PTs indicated that PTs were suited to provide OA risk and management information. CONCLUSION: HCPs routinely managing people with ACL injury do not consistently discuss OA risk post-injury with them. Educational strategies for HCPs are urgently needed to develop care pathways inclusive of support for OA risk management following ACL injury.

A cadaver model evaluating femoral intramedullary reaming: a comparison between new reamer design (Pressure Sentinel) and a novel suction/irrigation reamer (RIA).

OBJECTIVE: To compare the intramedullary pressures developed during reaming of cadaveric femurs with the Synthes Reamer/Irrigator/Aspirator (RIA) reamer and the Zimmer Pressure Sentinel (PS) reamer, controlling for the force and speed of reaming. METHOD: Fifteen matched pairs of frozen unpreserved femurs were used in the study. Two pressure transducers and two thermocouples were screwed into holes drilled into the femoral shaft. The femurs were stabilized in the vertical position by mechanically attaching them to a custom jig equipped with a load cell to detect the vertical component of force applied to the reamer. Proximally a linear voltage displacement transducer (LVDT) was attached to the reamer to record the continuous position of the reamer. All femurs were reamed to a diameter 2 mm larger than the narrowest point of the canal. Proximal and distal pressures, proximal and distal temperatures, applied vertical force and displacement were measured continuously throughout the reaming process. Maximum and minimum, and average proximal and distal pressures for each reamer were obtained and compared using paired t-tests. Averages were also calculated and compared in the same manner. A p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The maximum, minimum and average intramedullary pressures during reaming were significantly lower with the RIA system than the PS reamer. In general, the pressures produced by the RIA system were consistently below atmospheric pressure for the majority of the reaming time. This was not true for the PS system. No appreciable temperature changes were observed during any of the trials. CONCLUSION: The RIA reaming system significantly reduces the intramedullary pressures produced during the reaming process compared to the PS reaming system.