Search

Abstract Objective The present study aimed to relate the strength, assistance with walking, rising from a chair, climbing stairs, and falls (SARC-F) score with the presence or absence of fragility fracture in the population over 60 years of age. Methods The risk of sarcopenia was determined through the application of the SARC-F questionnaire, and the patients were divided into 2 groups, according to the occurrence or not of fragility fracture (n = 100). Results Thirty-two cases of distal radius fractures and eighteen cases of proximal femur fractures were identified. A higher score on the SARC-F is determinant between having or not a fragility fracture, estimating that for each point in the score there is a 70% increase in the chance of a patient having a fracture, regardless of age, gender, and body mass index (BMI). Conclusion There was a direct correlation between a higher score on the SARC-F and an increase in the chance of fragility fracture.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the reasoning mechanisms used by physicians in decision-making and how this compares to diagnostic clinical practice guidelines. We explored the clinical reasoning process in a real life environment. METHOD: This is a qualitative study evaluating transcriptions of sixteen physicians' reasoning during appointments with patients, clinical discussions between specialists, and personal interviews with physicians affiliated to a hospital in Brazil. RESULTS: FOUR MAIN THEMES WERE IDENTIFIED: simple and robust heuristics, extensive use of social environment rationality, attempts to prove diagnostic and therapeutic hypothesis while refuting potential contradictions using positive test strategy, and reaching the saturation point. Physicians constantly attempted to prove their initial hypothesis while trying to refute any contradictions. While social environment rationality was the main factor in the determination of all steps of the clinical reasoning process, factors such as referral letters and number of contradictions associated with the initial hypothesis had influence on physicians' confidence and determination of the threshold to reach a final decision. DISCUSSION: Physicians rely on simple heuristics associated with environmental factors. This model allows for robustness, simplicity, and cognitive energy saving. Since this model does not fit into current diagnostic clinical practice guidelines, we make some propositions to help its integration.

ABSTRACT Objective: To evaluate the inter and intraobserver agreement of the Magerl AO and AOSpine thoracolumbar fracture classification systems. Methods: The participants were divided into two groups, the first composed of six spinal surgeons and the other composed of 18 medical orthopedic residents. On two different occasions, separated by an interval of one month, the participants analyzed and classified 25 radiographs with thoracolumbar fractures using both thoracolumbar fracture classification systems, Magerl AO and AOSpine. The results were analyzed for classification reliability using the Kappa coefficient (k). Results: The Magerl AO classification system showed a fair interobserver agreement (k = 0.32), considering the fractures type and subtype, whereas the AOSpine classification system showed a moderate interobserver agreement (k = 0.59). The Magerl AO classification showed a fair intraobserver agreement for both residents and specialists (k = 0.21 and 0.38, respectively), while the AOSpine showed a substantial agreement between residents (k = 0.62) and moderate between specialists (k = 0.53). Conclusions: When evaluating fracture morphology, the AOSpine thoracolumbar fracture classification system presented a better reliability and reproducibility compared to the Magerl AO classification system.