Objective: : To investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of the controlled distraction-compression technique using an expandable titanium cage (ETC) in posttraumatic kyphosis (PTK). Methods: : We retrospectively studied and collected data on 20 patients with PTK. From January 2014 to December 2017, the controlled distraction-compression technique using ETC was consecutively performed in 20 patients with PTK of the thoracolumbar zone (range, 36–82 years). Among them, nine were males and 11 were females and the mean age was 61.5 years. The patients were followed regularly at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months, and the last follow-up was more than 2 years after surgery. Results: : The mean follow-up period was 27.3±7.3 months (range, 14–48). The average operation time was 286.8±33.1 minutes (range, 225–365). The preoperative regional kyphotic angle (RKA) ranged from 35.6° to 70.6° with an average of 47.5°±8.1°. The immediate postoperative mean RKA was 5.9°±3.8° (86.2% correction rate, p=0.000), and at the last follow-up more than 2 years later, the mean RKA was 9.2°±4.9° (80.2% correction rate, p=0.000). The preoperative mean thoracolumbar kyphosis was 49.1°±9.2° and was corrected to an average of 8.8°±5.3° immediately after surgery (p=0.000). At the last follow-up, a correction of 11.9°±6.3° was obtained (p=0.000). The preoperative mean back visual analog scale (VAS) score was 7.9±0.8 and at the last follow-up, the VAS score was improved to a mean of 2.3±1.0 with a 70.9% correction rate (p=0.000). The preoperative mean Oswestry disability index (ODI) score was 32.3±6.9 (64.6%) and the last follow-up ODI score was improved to a mean of 6.85±2.9 (3.7%) with a 78.8% correction rate (p=0.000). The overall complication was 15%, with two of distal junctional fractures and one of proximal junctional kyphosis and screw loosening. However, there were no complications directly related to the operation. Conclusion : PVCR through the controlled distraction-compression technique using ETC showed safe and good results in terms of complications, and clinical and radiologic outcomes in PTK. However, to further evaluate the efficacy of this surgical procedure, more patients need long-term follow-up and there is a need to apply it to other diseases.

Objective: : To analyze the accuracy of iliac screws using freehand technique performed by the same surgeon. We also analyzed how the breach of iliac screws was related to the clinical symptoms resulting in revision surgery. Methods: : From January 2009 to November 2015, 100 patients (193 iliac screws) were analyzed using postoperative computed tomography scans. The breaches were classified based on the superior, inferior, lateral, and medial iliac wall violation by the screw. According to the length of screw extrusion, the classification grades were as follows : grade 1, screw extrusion <1 cm; grade II, 1 cm ≤ screw extrusion <2 cm; grade III, 2 cm ≤ screw extrusion <3 cm; and grade IV, 3 cm ≤ screw extrusion. We also reviewed the revision surgery associated with iliac screw misplacement. Results: : Of the 193 inserted screws, 169 were correctly located and 24 were misplaced screws. There were eight grade I, six grade II, six grade III, and four grade IV screw breaches, and 11, 8, 2, and 3 screws violated the medial, lateral, superior, and inferior walls, respectively. Four revision surgeries were performed for the grade III or IV iliac screw breaches in the lateral or inferior direction with respect to its related symptoms. Conclusion : In iliac screw placement, 12.4% breaches developed. Although most breaches were not problematic, symptomatic violations (2.1%) could result in revision surgery. Notably, the surgeon should keep in mind that lateral or inferior wall breaches longer than 2 cm can be risky and should be avoided.

Objective: To evaluate the global practice pattern of wound dressing use after lumbar fusion for degenerative conditions. Methods: A survey issued by AO Spine Knowledge Forums Deformity and Degenerative was sent out to AO Spine members. The type of postoperative dressing employed, timing of initial dressing removal, and type of subsequent dressing applied were investigated. Differences in the type of surgery and regional distribution of surgeons’ preferences were analyzed. Results: Right following surgery, 60.6% utilized a dry dressing, 23.2% a plastic occlusive dressing, 5.7% glue, 6% a combination of glue and polyester mesh, 2.6% a wound vacuum, and 1.2% other dressings. The initial dressing was removed on postoperative day 1 (11.6%), 2 (39.2%), 3 (20.3%), 4 (1.7%), 5 (4.3%), 6 (0.4%), 7 or later (12.5%), or depending on drain removal (9.9%). Following initial dressing removal, 75.9% applied a dry dressing, 17.7% a plastic occlusive dressing, and 1.3% glue, while 12.1% used no dressing. The use of no additional coverage after initial dressing removal was significantly associated with a later dressing change (p < 0.001). Significant differences emerged after comparing dressing management among different AO Spine regions (p < 0.001). Conclusion Most spine surgeons utilized a dry or plastic occlusive dressing initially applied after surgery. The first dressing was more frequently changed during the first 3 postoperative days and replaced with the same type of dressing. While dressing policies tended not to vary according to the type of surgery, regional differences suggest that actual practice may be based on personal experience rather than available evidence.

Objective: Mobility limitations and falls are common in people with Parkinson’s disease (PwP). Compared with exercise alone, a tailored, multidomain intervention has the potential to be more effective in improving mobility safety and preventing falls. This study aimed to explore the feasibility and potential effectiveness of a multidomain fall prevention intervention (Integrate) designed for PwP who experience frequent falls. Methods: The home-based intervention was delivered over a span of 6 months by occupational therapists and physiotherapists. The personalized intervention included home fall hazard reduction, exercise, and safer mobility behavior training. The participants received 8 to 12 home visits and were supported by care-partners (when necessary) to participate in the intervention. Results: Twenty-nine people (recruitment rate: 49%; drop-out rate: 10%) with moderate to advanced Parkinson’s disease, a history of recurrent falls, and mild to moderate cognitive impairment participated in the study, with 26 people completing the study. A moderate-to-high adherence to the intervention was observed, and there were no adverse events related to the intervention. Twenty-one (81%) participants met or exceeded their safer mobility goal based on the Goal Attainment Scale. The participants exhibited a median 1.0-point clinically meaningful improvement according to the Short Physical Performance Battery. An exploratory analysis revealed that fall rates were reduced by almost 50% in the 6-month follow-up period (incidence rate ratio: 0.51; 95% confidence interval 0.28–0.92). Conclusion A multidomain occupational therapy and physiotherapy intervention for PwP experiencing recurrent falls was feasible and appeared to improve mobility safety. A randomized trial powered to detect the effects of the intervention on falls and mobility is warranted.

Objective: To evaluate the global practice pattern of wound dressing use after lumbar fusion for degenerative conditions. Methods: A survey issued by AO Spine Knowledge Forums Deformity and Degenerative was sent out to AO Spine members. The type of postoperative dressing employed, timing of initial dressing removal, and type of subsequent dressing applied were investigated. Differences in the type of surgery and regional distribution of surgeons’ preferences were analyzed. Results: Right following surgery, 60.6% utilized a dry dressing, 23.2% a plastic occlusive dressing, 5.7% glue, 6% a combination of glue and polyester mesh, 2.6% a wound vacuum, and 1.2% other dressings. The initial dressing was removed on postoperative day 1 (11.6%), 2 (39.2%), 3 (20.3%), 4 (1.7%), 5 (4.3%), 6 (0.4%), 7 or later (12.5%), or depending on drain removal (9.9%). Following initial dressing removal, 75.9% applied a dry dressing, 17.7% a plastic occlusive dressing, and 1.3% glue, while 12.1% used no dressing. The use of no additional coverage after initial dressing removal was significantly associated with a later dressing change (p < 0.001). Significant differences emerged after comparing dressing management among different AO Spine regions (p < 0.001). Conclusion Most spine surgeons utilized a dry or plastic occlusive dressing initially applied after surgery. The first dressing was more frequently changed during the first 3 postoperative days and replaced with the same type of dressing. While dressing policies tended not to vary according to the type of surgery, regional differences suggest that actual practice may be based on personal experience rather than available evidence.

Objective: To evaluate the global practice pattern of wound dressing use after lumbar fusion for degenerative conditions. Methods: A survey issued by AO Spine Knowledge Forums Deformity and Degenerative was sent out to AO Spine members. The type of postoperative dressing employed, timing of initial dressing removal, and type of subsequent dressing applied were investigated. Differences in the type of surgery and regional distribution of surgeons’ preferences were analyzed. Results: Right following surgery, 60.6% utilized a dry dressing, 23.2% a plastic occlusive dressing, 5.7% glue, 6% a combination of glue and polyester mesh, 2.6% a wound vacuum, and 1.2% other dressings. The initial dressing was removed on postoperative day 1 (11.6%), 2 (39.2%), 3 (20.3%), 4 (1.7%), 5 (4.3%), 6 (0.4%), 7 or later (12.5%), or depending on drain removal (9.9%). Following initial dressing removal, 75.9% applied a dry dressing, 17.7% a plastic occlusive dressing, and 1.3% glue, while 12.1% used no dressing. The use of no additional coverage after initial dressing removal was significantly associated with a later dressing change (p < 0.001). Significant differences emerged after comparing dressing management among different AO Spine regions (p < 0.001). Conclusion Most spine surgeons utilized a dry or plastic occlusive dressing initially applied after surgery. The first dressing was more frequently changed during the first 3 postoperative days and replaced with the same type of dressing. While dressing policies tended not to vary according to the type of surgery, regional differences suggest that actual practice may be based on personal experience rather than available evidence.

Objective: Mobility limitations and falls are common in people with Parkinson’s disease (PwP). Compared with exercise alone, a tailored, multidomain intervention has the potential to be more effective in improving mobility safety and preventing falls. This study aimed to explore the feasibility and potential effectiveness of a multidomain fall prevention intervention (Integrate) designed for PwP who experience frequent falls. Methods: The home-based intervention was delivered over a span of 6 months by occupational therapists and physiotherapists. The personalized intervention included home fall hazard reduction, exercise, and safer mobility behavior training. The participants received 8 to 12 home visits and were supported by care-partners (when necessary) to participate in the intervention. Results: Twenty-nine people (recruitment rate: 49%; drop-out rate: 10%) with moderate to advanced Parkinson’s disease, a history of recurrent falls, and mild to moderate cognitive impairment participated in the study, with 26 people completing the study. A moderate-to-high adherence to the intervention was observed, and there were no adverse events related to the intervention. Twenty-one (81%) participants met or exceeded their safer mobility goal based on the Goal Attainment Scale. The participants exhibited a median 1.0-point clinically meaningful improvement according to the Short Physical Performance Battery. An exploratory analysis revealed that fall rates were reduced by almost 50% in the 6-month follow-up period (incidence rate ratio: 0.51; 95% confidence interval 0.28–0.92). Conclusion A multidomain occupational therapy and physiotherapy intervention for PwP experiencing recurrent falls was feasible and appeared to improve mobility safety. A randomized trial powered to detect the effects of the intervention on falls and mobility is warranted.

Objective: To evaluate the global practice pattern of wound dressing use after lumbar fusion for degenerative conditions. Methods: A survey issued by AO Spine Knowledge Forums Deformity and Degenerative was sent out to AO Spine members. The type of postoperative dressing employed, timing of initial dressing removal, and type of subsequent dressing applied were investigated. Differences in the type of surgery and regional distribution of surgeons’ preferences were analyzed. Results: Right following surgery, 60.6% utilized a dry dressing, 23.2% a plastic occlusive dressing, 5.7% glue, 6% a combination of glue and polyester mesh, 2.6% a wound vacuum, and 1.2% other dressings. The initial dressing was removed on postoperative day 1 (11.6%), 2 (39.2%), 3 (20.3%), 4 (1.7%), 5 (4.3%), 6 (0.4%), 7 or later (12.5%), or depending on drain removal (9.9%). Following initial dressing removal, 75.9% applied a dry dressing, 17.7% a plastic occlusive dressing, and 1.3% glue, while 12.1% used no dressing. The use of no additional coverage after initial dressing removal was significantly associated with a later dressing change (p < 0.001). Significant differences emerged after comparing dressing management among different AO Spine regions (p < 0.001). Conclusion Most spine surgeons utilized a dry or plastic occlusive dressing initially applied after surgery. The first dressing was more frequently changed during the first 3 postoperative days and replaced with the same type of dressing. While dressing policies tended not to vary according to the type of surgery, regional differences suggest that actual practice may be based on personal experience rather than available evidence.

Objective: Mobility limitations and falls are common in people with Parkinson’s disease (PwP). Compared with exercise alone, a tailored, multidomain intervention has the potential to be more effective in improving mobility safety and preventing falls. This study aimed to explore the feasibility and potential effectiveness of a multidomain fall prevention intervention (Integrate) designed for PwP who experience frequent falls. Methods: The home-based intervention was delivered over a span of 6 months by occupational therapists and physiotherapists. The personalized intervention included home fall hazard reduction, exercise, and safer mobility behavior training. The participants received 8 to 12 home visits and were supported by care-partners (when necessary) to participate in the intervention. Results: Twenty-nine people (recruitment rate: 49%; drop-out rate: 10%) with moderate to advanced Parkinson’s disease, a history of recurrent falls, and mild to moderate cognitive impairment participated in the study, with 26 people completing the study. A moderate-to-high adherence to the intervention was observed, and there were no adverse events related to the intervention. Twenty-one (81%) participants met or exceeded their safer mobility goal based on the Goal Attainment Scale. The participants exhibited a median 1.0-point clinically meaningful improvement according to the Short Physical Performance Battery. An exploratory analysis revealed that fall rates were reduced by almost 50% in the 6-month follow-up period (incidence rate ratio: 0.51; 95% confidence interval 0.28–0.92). Conclusion A multidomain occupational therapy and physiotherapy intervention for PwP experiencing recurrent falls was feasible and appeared to improve mobility safety. A randomized trial powered to detect the effects of the intervention on falls and mobility is warranted.

Objective: To evaluate the global practice pattern of wound dressing use after lumbar fusion for degenerative conditions. Methods: A survey issued by AO Spine Knowledge Forums Deformity and Degenerative was sent out to AO Spine members. The type of postoperative dressing employed, timing of initial dressing removal, and type of subsequent dressing applied were investigated. Differences in the type of surgery and regional distribution of surgeons’ preferences were analyzed. Results: Right following surgery, 60.6% utilized a dry dressing, 23.2% a plastic occlusive dressing, 5.7% glue, 6% a combination of glue and polyester mesh, 2.6% a wound vacuum, and 1.2% other dressings. The initial dressing was removed on postoperative day 1 (11.6%), 2 (39.2%), 3 (20.3%), 4 (1.7%), 5 (4.3%), 6 (0.4%), 7 or later (12.5%), or depending on drain removal (9.9%). Following initial dressing removal, 75.9% applied a dry dressing, 17.7% a plastic occlusive dressing, and 1.3% glue, while 12.1% used no dressing. The use of no additional coverage after initial dressing removal was significantly associated with a later dressing change (p < 0.001). Significant differences emerged after comparing dressing management among different AO Spine regions (p < 0.001). Conclusion Most spine surgeons utilized a dry or plastic occlusive dressing initially applied after surgery. The first dressing was more frequently changed during the first 3 postoperative days and replaced with the same type of dressing. While dressing policies tended not to vary according to the type of surgery, regional differences suggest that actual practice may be based on personal experience rather than available evidence.