Lab 15-1 Lab Report

Imaging tests will be done to check whether there is damage to blood vessels or nerves around your knee. This may include a test that involves injecting a special dye into your blood vessels and looking at the dye through a CT scan (angiogram). An MRI or Doppler ultrasound could also be done.

In this study, a randomized and concealed method supported by a computer was conducted prospectively for patients who showed signs of radiographic knee OA. In addition, without knowing further about the clinical status of participants, knee radiographs were assessed in the study of baseline and follow ups by an experienced surgeon. The baseline characteristics of subjects such as age and BMI were not significantly different. Criteria included were the radiographically confirmed as knee OA (a score ≥ 1 out of 4 on the K/L scale), ability to walk to the site, understand and make signature on the written consent of information form and report the data required. However, the research did not include the participants

After the images are taken, a radiologist can manipulate the digital images by inverting, magnifying, and changing the contrast to double-check the site of the lesion. The computer will then graph the site of the lesion by using x, y, and z coordinates. Once the imaging has been done, the next step is setting up the needle.

Methods: Surgery was performed in 90 patients using the TAG. The component was inserted at a position between the SL and PCA. An intraoperative photograph was taken of the distal cut surface of the femur

In Ober test physical therapist will be holding the knee of the testing leg in flexion and in

The patient is in an erect position facing the image receptor to result in less heart magnification. Feet should be slightly apart with weight distributed evenly. The chin was raised, and hands are placed on the bilateral hip regions with palms facing out, or having both arms around the bucky. The shoulders should be rolled forward and depressed to down to prevent superimposition of scapulae over the lung field.

Second, I would like to question Dr. Minor about his impairment finding for the bilateral knees. More specifically, I would like to know where he saw a 1mm cartilage loss of both knees. I suspect he must have seen it on an imaging study (i.e., X-ray or MRI) but it was not explicitly documented in the report (or I may have missed it).

Exclusion criteria were more than fifteen degree of varus deformity, more than twenty degree of flexion contracture and muscle weakness from neuromuscular disease including Parkinsonism or cerebral lesion. The groups consisted of twelve patients (twenty knees) who had total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with a representative MR designed implant (B Braun-Aesculap Vega® Knee System) and thirteen patients (seventeen knees) who had TKA with a representative GR designed implant (Depuy Attune® Knee System)

•Diagnose foot, ankle, and lower leg injuries through physical exams, x-rays, and medical laboratory tests.​

All patients included in the study were recalled for subjective, objective, and functional evaluation; the study protocol involved the range of motion (ROM), ligamentous stability, Tegner-Lysholm Score, Modified Cincinnati Rating System Questionnaire, Short Form-12 (SF-12) in addition to the plain radiograph, computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the knee. According to international knee documentation committee (IKDC) score, any development of arthrosis was assessed at the final follow-up.

Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is now widely used for imaging injuries of internal structures of the knee, and has replaced conventional arthrography and diagnosticu arthroscopy. It is usuperior to computedu tomography (CT) for imagingu of soft tissue structures. Accurate MR imagingu diagnosis and interpretation allow a more complete identification of the extent of injuries and aids clinical management (2) .

Diagnostic imaging is one of the services the physicians use to optimize the patient management. Decades ago, the physiotherapists’ role in ordering or referring for diagnostic imagining was existed. For example, in 1972 the physical therapists have practiced as first access with the privileges of imaging and they were recognized as musculoskeletal providers (Benson, Schreck, Underwood, & Greathouse, 1995). Physical therapists have shown their equivalent abilities in accurately diagnosing and managing the musculoskeletal conditions as the orthopedic surgeons and categorizing if the patient in needed to be referred for further investigations as diagnostic imaging (Desmeules et al., 2013). Moreover, they have been found more accurate in diagnosing musculoskeletal conditions than non-orthopedic clinicians. (Moore et al., 2005).

This was because 34 were non-responders and 2 declined radiographs. Of the 1,003 controls, radiographic information was available for a total of 977. Thus, the total number of subjects for each group was 81 ex-athletes and 977 controls. Using radiologic images, ex-athletes were found to have a crude OR (95% confidence interval (CI)) of 1.09 (95% CI 0.51-2.31) with narrowing of the PF joint when compared to the control. When adjusting for age alone, the OR increased to 2.27 (95% CI 0.97-5.34). Further adjustments of age, height, and weight showed an increase in OR to 2.97 (95% CI 1.15-7.67). Resulting OR for narrowing of the hip were 1.53 (95% CI 0.73-3.18). When adjusting for age, the OR increased to 1.67 (95% CI 0.78-3.42). When adjusting for age, height, and weight, the OR slightly decreased to 1.60 (95% CI 0.73-3.48) when compared to just adjusting for age. The OR for osteophytes was highest in the TF joint at 3.57 (95% CI 1.89-6.71) when adjusting for age, height, and weight. Significant joint space narrowing was found to be 0.41mm (p < 0.002) in the TF joints of ex-athletes with OA. Narrowing of the PF joints showed to have an OR of 2.97 (95% CI 1.15-7.67). These findings show that ex-athletes had a greater risk of developing OA than the control group. This risk also increased with adjustments for age, height, and weight between groups. In conclusion, the authors stated

Introduction seemed contradictory; as seventy five per cent accuracy of diagnosis can be made on history alone (Daniel, 1982; DeHaven, 1975) followed by specific clinical tests with above average accuracy. Very brief essentially, non-existent literature review. Besides mention of the population susceptible to meniscal injury, other relevant information pertaining to the injury wasn’t briefed. Such as, the mechanism of injury as well as the classic signs and symptoms experienced by an individual after meniscal pathology. Neither the introduction nor the brief literature review goes over what exactly sensitivity and specificity imply in the results. Sensitivity being how good the test is at detecting meniscal tears and specificity being how good the test is at identifying normal knee (Mohan, 2007). Also, there is no mention of what constitutes a false-positive and a false-negative result encountered during

Establish if radiographers have the prerequisite knowledge of collimation and how to apply it adequately.