1.Sexual dysfunction and quality of life after spinal cord Injury
Yatao OUYANG ; Zhean LIAO ; Qinglia XIAN ; Yuanwen XU ; Wenhua DENG
Chinese Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2008;30(8):534-536
Objective To investigate sexual dysfunction and its rehabilitation,as well as quality of life in patients after spinal cord injury(SCI). Methods Sixty-two male patients with SCl were assessed with a 5-item version of the International Index of Erectile Function(IIEF-5),an especially-designed sexual function scale,and the World Health Organization's quality of life questionnaire(WHO-QOL).Their results were compared with those of 146 other patients with work injuries hospitalized in the same period.Results 77.9% of 62 cases had moderate to severe erectile dysfunction.though more than half of them remained sexually active.52.7% had attempted sexual intercourse,but only 19.5% succeeded,and only 14.5% obtained sexual satisfaction.69.1% of the 62 patients had psychological symptoms,and 27.27% had family problems.Their average score on the WHO-QOL was significantly lower than that of the other disabled workers.There were significant differences between the two groups with regard to quality of life.especially in the physiological and social relationships domains. Conclusion Most male patients with SCI had sexual dysfunction and decreased quality of life.Sexual dysfunction rehabilitation of SCI patients needs urgent strengthening.
2.Early clinical outcomes of dynamization versus superior capsular reconstruction for the treatment of irreparable post-superior massive rotator cuff tears
Jun WANG ; Zhou ZHOU ; Huaisheng LI ; Yatao LIAO ; Guo ZHENG ; Chenke ZHANG ; Zhenyu WANG ; Binghua ZHOU
Chinese Journal of Orthopaedics 2024;44(14):938-946
Objective:To explore and compare early postoperative clinical outcomes between dynamic and classical superior capsular reconstruction for the treatment of irreparable post-superior massive rotator cuff tears (MIRCTs).Methods:29 patients with MIRCTs treated with autologous fascia dynamic SCR (14) and classical SCR (15) at Department of Sports Medicine of the First Affiliated Hospital of Army Medical University from September 2019 to March 2022 were retrospectively analyzed on preoperative and final follow-up pain visual analogue scale (VAS), Constant-Murley score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) score, range of motion (ROM), acromiohumeral distance (AHD), Sugaya classification and Goutallier classification.Results:All 29 patients were followed up with an average follow-up time of 36.50±8.18 months for dynamized SCR and 29.33±9.15 months for classical SCR, respectively. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of gender, age, course of disease and preoperative AHD ( P>0.05). At the final follow-up, there was no significant difference in the degree of improvement in forward flexion (81.79°±36.14° vs. 69.00°±40.19°, t=0.899, P=0.377), abduction [87.50°(71.25°, 122.50°) vs. 80.00°(45.00°, 95.00°), Z=-1.400, P=0.172] and internal rotation [5.00°(5.00°, 6.00°) vs. 4.00°(1.00°, 6.00°), Z=-0.871, P=0.400]; external rotation improved significantly in the dynamic SCR group compared to classical SCR group [37.50°(30.00°, 41.25°) vs. 25.00°(15.00°, 30.00°), Z=-2.285, P=0.019]. Although both groups showed clinical improvements, no significant difference was found between the dynamic SCR group and the classical SCR group on VAS [4.00(3.75, 5.00) vs. 4.00(3.00, 5.00), Z=-0.029, P=0.949], ASES score (50.99±7.98 vs. 46.47±13.73, t=1.074, P=0.293), Constant-Murley score [62.50(54.00, 69.50) vs. 56.00(47.00, 62.00), Z=-1.956, P=0.112] and UCLA score (20.21±3.53 vs. 18.40±3.87, t=1.315, P=0.199). At the final follow-up, patients in the dynamic SCR group had a higher degree of improvement in AHD (3.66±2.22 mm vs. 2.00±1.75 mm, t=2.247, P=0.033). There was no significant difference in Sugaya grading between the two groups at the final follow-up ( Z=-0.370, P=0.747). As for the degree of improvement in Goutallier's grading, there was an improvement in the dynamic SCR group at the final follow-up versus the preoperative period ( Z=-2.101, P=0.036), while there was no significant difference in the degree of improvement in the classical SCR group at the final follow-up versus the preoperative period ( Z=-0.700, P>0.05). Conclusion:Both dynamic SCR and classical SCR for MIRCTs significantly improved shoulder function. Significant improvements in external rotation, AHD and Goutallier grading were observed in the dynamic SCR group compared to the classical SCR group.