Objective: This study aimed to compare the clinical and comprehensive radiological outcomes of 3 types of endoscopic decompression surgery: unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar decompression (UBELD), microendoscopic laminotomy (MEL), and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression (PELD). Methods: Patients with single-level lumbar spinal stenosis without instability were included in this multicenter retrospective study. Visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for each extremity, VAS back pain, and Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores at preoperative and postoperative 1st, 6th, and 12th months were used as clinical outcome measures. In order to compare the radiological results of the patients, bilateral superior articular distance (SAD), bilateral lateral recess height (LR height), bilateral lateral recess angle (LR angle), and cross-sectional spinal canal area values were measured. Results: Eighty patients in the UBELD group, 73 patients in the MEL group, and 62 patients in the PELD group were included in the study. There was a statistically significant improvement in VAS scores and JOA scores in all groups compared to the preoperative period. At the 12th month postoperatively, the highest lateral decompression values on the approach side were determined as MEL (SAD: 4.1 mm, LR angle: 38.8°, LR height: 4.0 mm), followed by UBELD (SAD: 3.6 mm, LR angle: 36.2°, LR height: 3.3 mm) and PELD (SAD: 3.0 mm, LR angle: 21.7°, LR height: 2.3 mm), respectively. For the contralateral side, the highest lateral recess decompression values were listed as UBELD > MEL > PELD. Conclusion Effective decompression can be performed using all endoscopic techniques in lumbar spinal stenosis. However lateral recess decompression values were found to be better in UBELD and MEL techniques, compared to PELD.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the clinical and comprehensive radiological outcomes of 3 types of endoscopic decompression surgery: unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar decompression (UBELD), microendoscopic laminotomy (MEL), and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression (PELD). Methods: Patients with single-level lumbar spinal stenosis without instability were included in this multicenter retrospective study. Visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for each extremity, VAS back pain, and Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores at preoperative and postoperative 1st, 6th, and 12th months were used as clinical outcome measures. In order to compare the radiological results of the patients, bilateral superior articular distance (SAD), bilateral lateral recess height (LR height), bilateral lateral recess angle (LR angle), and cross-sectional spinal canal area values were measured. Results: Eighty patients in the UBELD group, 73 patients in the MEL group, and 62 patients in the PELD group were included in the study. There was a statistically significant improvement in VAS scores and JOA scores in all groups compared to the preoperative period. At the 12th month postoperatively, the highest lateral decompression values on the approach side were determined as MEL (SAD: 4.1 mm, LR angle: 38.8°, LR height: 4.0 mm), followed by UBELD (SAD: 3.6 mm, LR angle: 36.2°, LR height: 3.3 mm) and PELD (SAD: 3.0 mm, LR angle: 21.7°, LR height: 2.3 mm), respectively. For the contralateral side, the highest lateral recess decompression values were listed as UBELD > MEL > PELD. Conclusion Effective decompression can be performed using all endoscopic techniques in lumbar spinal stenosis. However lateral recess decompression values were found to be better in UBELD and MEL techniques, compared to PELD.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the clinical and comprehensive radiological outcomes of 3 types of endoscopic decompression surgery: unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar decompression (UBELD), microendoscopic laminotomy (MEL), and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression (PELD). Methods: Patients with single-level lumbar spinal stenosis without instability were included in this multicenter retrospective study. Visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for each extremity, VAS back pain, and Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores at preoperative and postoperative 1st, 6th, and 12th months were used as clinical outcome measures. In order to compare the radiological results of the patients, bilateral superior articular distance (SAD), bilateral lateral recess height (LR height), bilateral lateral recess angle (LR angle), and cross-sectional spinal canal area values were measured. Results: Eighty patients in the UBELD group, 73 patients in the MEL group, and 62 patients in the PELD group were included in the study. There was a statistically significant improvement in VAS scores and JOA scores in all groups compared to the preoperative period. At the 12th month postoperatively, the highest lateral decompression values on the approach side were determined as MEL (SAD: 4.1 mm, LR angle: 38.8°, LR height: 4.0 mm), followed by UBELD (SAD: 3.6 mm, LR angle: 36.2°, LR height: 3.3 mm) and PELD (SAD: 3.0 mm, LR angle: 21.7°, LR height: 2.3 mm), respectively. For the contralateral side, the highest lateral recess decompression values were listed as UBELD > MEL > PELD. Conclusion Effective decompression can be performed using all endoscopic techniques in lumbar spinal stenosis. However lateral recess decompression values were found to be better in UBELD and MEL techniques, compared to PELD.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the clinical and comprehensive radiological outcomes of 3 types of endoscopic decompression surgery: unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar decompression (UBELD), microendoscopic laminotomy (MEL), and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression (PELD). Methods: Patients with single-level lumbar spinal stenosis without instability were included in this multicenter retrospective study. Visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for each extremity, VAS back pain, and Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores at preoperative and postoperative 1st, 6th, and 12th months were used as clinical outcome measures. In order to compare the radiological results of the patients, bilateral superior articular distance (SAD), bilateral lateral recess height (LR height), bilateral lateral recess angle (LR angle), and cross-sectional spinal canal area values were measured. Results: Eighty patients in the UBELD group, 73 patients in the MEL group, and 62 patients in the PELD group were included in the study. There was a statistically significant improvement in VAS scores and JOA scores in all groups compared to the preoperative period. At the 12th month postoperatively, the highest lateral decompression values on the approach side were determined as MEL (SAD: 4.1 mm, LR angle: 38.8°, LR height: 4.0 mm), followed by UBELD (SAD: 3.6 mm, LR angle: 36.2°, LR height: 3.3 mm) and PELD (SAD: 3.0 mm, LR angle: 21.7°, LR height: 2.3 mm), respectively. For the contralateral side, the highest lateral recess decompression values were listed as UBELD > MEL > PELD. Conclusion Effective decompression can be performed using all endoscopic techniques in lumbar spinal stenosis. However lateral recess decompression values were found to be better in UBELD and MEL techniques, compared to PELD.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the clinical and comprehensive radiological outcomes of 3 types of endoscopic decompression surgery: unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar decompression (UBELD), microendoscopic laminotomy (MEL), and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression (PELD). Methods: Patients with single-level lumbar spinal stenosis without instability were included in this multicenter retrospective study. Visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for each extremity, VAS back pain, and Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores at preoperative and postoperative 1st, 6th, and 12th months were used as clinical outcome measures. In order to compare the radiological results of the patients, bilateral superior articular distance (SAD), bilateral lateral recess height (LR height), bilateral lateral recess angle (LR angle), and cross-sectional spinal canal area values were measured. Results: Eighty patients in the UBELD group, 73 patients in the MEL group, and 62 patients in the PELD group were included in the study. There was a statistically significant improvement in VAS scores and JOA scores in all groups compared to the preoperative period. At the 12th month postoperatively, the highest lateral decompression values on the approach side were determined as MEL (SAD: 4.1 mm, LR angle: 38.8°, LR height: 4.0 mm), followed by UBELD (SAD: 3.6 mm, LR angle: 36.2°, LR height: 3.3 mm) and PELD (SAD: 3.0 mm, LR angle: 21.7°, LR height: 2.3 mm), respectively. For the contralateral side, the highest lateral recess decompression values were listed as UBELD > MEL > PELD. Conclusion Effective decompression can be performed using all endoscopic techniques in lumbar spinal stenosis. However lateral recess decompression values were found to be better in UBELD and MEL techniques, compared to PELD.

We conduct an outpatient escort program as a part of our early exposure curriculum for first-year medical students. Each student escorts one patient at the University of Tsukuba Hospital throughout his or her first visit. We evaluated this program from the points of view of both students and patients.
1) A questionnaire was distributed to all participating patients and students in 2006.
2) In their questionnaires, many students commented on the long waiting time, the structural problems of the hospital, and the attitudes of physicians.
3) Results of the questionnaire showed that both students and patients rated this program highly.
4) No significant differences were noted between the comments of the students and those of the patients. The patients tended to rate this program more highly than did the students. One patient, however, commented that being constantly accompanied by a stranger was somewhat stressful.
5) We conclude that this program can be efficiently carried out without being too much of a burden to patients and is a valuable part of an early exposure program for first-year medical students.

We conducted an outpatient escort program as a part of our early exposure curriculum for first-year medical students. Each student escorted one patient at the University of Tsukuba Hospital throughout his or her first visit. This program enabled the students to experience and think about the system of a university hospital from a patient's point of view. We believe that this program is useful to motivate first-year medical students in their future studies.

We report a clinical study conducted to investigate the effects of Electric Field Therapy (EFT) generated by HEALTHTRON on the stiffness in the neck and shoulder area. In Japan, most cases of stiffness in the neck and shoulder area are caused by painfully hypertonic muscles due to various causes such as cervical damage, mechanical stress, disordered cutaneous sensation and psychogenic stress. Internal disorders can also be significant causes of the painful stiffness in the neck and shoulder area. Subjects were 62 outpatients with chief complaints of stiffness in the neck and shoulder area. Informed consent was obtained from each subject. The patients with organic and/or pathological changes in the muscloskeletal system, mental disorder, or internal disease were not included in this study according to the exclusion criteria for feasible focus in hypertonic muscles.
The present study consists of two comparisons, 1) standard treatment in our clinic vs. additional HEALTHTRON, by observing the visual analogue scale (VAS) of stiffness in the neck and shoulder area and general condition, lymphocyte percentage in peripheral blood, blood pressure, and 2) HEALTHTRON alone vs. direct-contact electric stimulation (DCES) alone by observing circulatory blood in the trapezium, and the changes of autonomic nervous activity by heart rate variability (HRV). Results of the first research revealed that the stiffness in the neck and shoulder area was improved more quickly by additional HEALTHTRON than by the standard treatment, according to the results of VAS analysis. The general conditions were also improved in the patients treated with the additional HEALTHTRON. The lymphocyte percentage was increased by the addition HEALTHTRON, which suggested that parasympathetic nerve get a predominant position. The average blood pressure in the hypertensive patients in both groups was decreased after the treatment in this investigation, but blood pressure did not change in the patients with hypotension. The second research found that the blood circulation in the trapezium increased in each group treated with HEALTHTRON or DCES; however, the differences between two groups were not statistically significant. No changes in activity of the autonomic regulation were observed in the patients treated with DCES from an analysis of HRV. In contrast, the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems were activated by HEALTHTRON, according to HRV analysis. These results suggest that EFT (HEALTHTRON) are effective for treating stiffness in the neck and shoulder area, and improve the status of the autonomic nervous system.

Fifth-year medical students at the Yamaguchi University School of Medicine must pass an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) before beginning bedside learning. Because the OSCE is performed over 3 days, examinees on later days are suspected of having an advantage over those tested on early days. In this study, mean values for each day's scores by one examiner were statistically compared in stations of the medical interview to investigate the difference in scores obtained on each of the OSCE days. In addition, for stations at which one student was evaluated by two examiners, their scores for each student were compared statistically in the same manner. We found no significant day-todaydifferences in mean values of the scores over the 3 examination days. However, significant differences were found between the two examiners' scores in 2 of 3 stations for the medical interview. Although there were no differences in scores among participants during the 3-day communication OSCE, examiner's evaluations and formats should be standardized for OSCE stations.

Thirty-one outpatients with acute low back pain were all educated about activities of daily living. They also received spinal manipulation and SSP (TENS), and took NSAID for a certain period of time. Half of them were additionally exposed an electric field using HEAL THTRON, an electric field therapeutic decice, in order to analyze its efficacy.
The patients were randomly divided (non-blind test) into two groups. Those who received ordinary treatment were called the Non-HEALTHTRON group (NH-group); those who received HEALTHTRON treatment in addition to ordinary treatment were called the HEALTHTRON Treatment group (H-group). During the 15-day study period, the patients were subjected to a total of four electric field exposures using HEALTHTRON. Efficacy of the treatment was measured as an objective evaluation by measuring range of motion (ROM) using an inclinometer, and Peak torque and Total work using a dynamometer. A subjective evaluation was performed using the Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire, ADL pain questionnaire, Visual analog scale for Patient global assessment, VAS (Patient) and Visual analog scale for Physician global assessment, VAS (Physician). After ordinary treatment, significant improvement was found in all 31 patients with acute low back pain. The VAS (Physician), ADL pain questionnaire and ROM were more significantly improved in the H-group than in the NH-group.