Bone allograft use in trauma and orthopaedic surgery is limited by the potential for cross infection due to inadequate acceptable decontamination methods. Current methods for allograft decontamination either put the recipient at risk of potentially pathogenic organisms or markedly reduce the mechanical strength and biological properties of bone. This study developed a technique of sterilization of donor bone which also maintains its mechanical properties. Whole mature rat femurs were studied, as analogous to strut allograft. Bones were inoculated by vortexing in a solution of pathogens likely to cause cross infection in the human bone graft situation. Inoculated bones were subjected to supercritical carbon dioxide at 250 bar pressure at 35 degrees celsius for different experimental time periods until a set of conditions for sterilization was achieved. Decontamination was assessed by vortexing the treated bone in culture broth and plating this on suitable culture medium for 24 hours. The broth was also subcultured. Controls were untreated-, gamma irradiated- and dehydrated bone. Mechanical testing of the bones by precision three-point bending to failure was performed and the dimensions and cross-section digitally assessed so values could be expressed in terms of stress. Mechanical testing revealed bone treated with supercritical carbon dioxide was consistently significantly stronger than that subjected to gamma irradiation and bones having no treatment (due to the minor dehydrating effect of the carbon dioxide). Terminal sterilization of bone is achieved using supercritical carbon dioxide and this method maintains the mechanical properties. The new technique greatly enhances potential for bone allograft in orthopaedic surgery.
Patients’ who had consulted both mainstream and CAM practitioners reported the poorest health outcomes (EQ 5D = 0.55), followed by those who consulted just mainstream practitioners (EQ 5D = 0.61), and those who had consulted no one (EQ 5D = 0.72). The best health outcomes were reported amongst those who had just consulted CAM practitioners (EQ 5D =0.78). In multivariate analyses, the most powerful predictors of consulting both mainstream and CAM practitioners were working and having high levels of pain related disability.
reported practice (based on a vignette of a patient with non-specific LBP) beliefs and attitudes about LBP(using the HC-PAIRS, Rainville et al 1995)
Patients who consulted complementary practitioners were more likely to be female, to be psychologically distressed, to work, to have left school aged over 16 and to have severe pain (p<
0.05 in all cases). Working was independently associated with consulting a complementary practitioner (Exp (B) = 2.0, p=0.00)
1) beliefs and attitudes about LBP 2) reported practice (using a clinical vignette)
A total of 3602 questionnaires were posted to simple random samples of UK registered chiropractors (n=611), osteopaths (n=1367) and physiotherapists (n=1624). Intervention packages were sent to consenting practitioners in March 2004, and the follow-up is planned for September 2004.
The objective of this study was to explore and identify perceptions, attitudes and beliefs held by practitioners from these three professional groups about their approaches to the care of LBP patients.
Preliminary categories of themes that emerged were: Evidence; Perceived Knowledge; Personality Characteristics; Professional Identity; The Patient; and Motivation. Of particular interest, practitioners seem to have mixed opinions with regard to basing their practice on evidence from external research.
Explored patient’s or practitioners; beliefs and expectations, or both. Studied patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain, which does not have a known systemic, inflammatory or malignant origin treated in primary or community care. The full review group resolved disagreements. Full text articles meeting the inclusion criteria will be obtained and coded further into non-randomised studies, randomised studies and qualitative studies. Data abstraction forms will be developed for each type of study. Data abstraction will be undertaken by two members of the group working independently.
The traditional biomedical model of managing musculoskeletal problems, such as low back pain (LBP), tends to be pathology driven, in which the aim is to locate an objectively identified disturbance. Appropriate treatment is conceptualised as a physical intervention that will compensate for or correct the identified disturbance. There is growing appreciation of the need to consider other factors, e.g. the meaning of the problem to the patient and professional, his/her experiences, cognitions, motivations and preferences. Improving the understanding about the beliefs and expectations of patients and health professionals is fundamental, since a better understanding of these factors, and any mismatch between professionals and patients, will facilitate improved management. A multidisciplinary group of researchers (chiropractor, GP, osteopath, physiotherapist, psychologist, sociologist) have developed a collaborative research programme to investigate the decision-making processes in the care of patients with musculoskeletal pain. The programme uses mixed methods, including systematic reviews, survey research, focus groups and semi-structured interviews with patients and practitioners. Three studies have already started: patient and health professional beliefs and expectations for the causes and treatment of chronic musculoskeletal pain. 1) Funded by the ARC, the purpose is to develop an understanding of the relationships between the different, professional and lay, theoretical frameworks used to diagnose and treat chronic musculoskeletal pain, and how these affect care. 2) Clinicians cognitions in apparently ineffective treatment of low back pain: funded by the ESRC, the purpose is to identify the reasons clinicians continue to treat LBP in the absence of improvement. Research on risk factors for the transition from acute to chronic LBP has concentrated on patient characteristics (psychological and social). It is possible that clinicians’ behaviour, advice and even treatment contribute to maintaining the problem indirectly. 3) Overcoming barriers to evidence-based practice (EBP) in LBP management in the physical therapy professions; funded by the Department of Physiotherapy Studies, Keele University, this study aims to explore the perceptions of physiotherapists, chiropractors and osteopaths, about the opportunities and threats of taking an EBP approach to LBP management and identify methods by which implementation of evidence can be facilitated. This collaboration is the first of its kind and was developed through shared interests in the decision-making processes in the healthcare of people with musculoskeletal pain. We are keen to share the ideas and work in progress with the wider musculoskeletal pain research community.