Search

Background: Low back pain is a very common phenomenon in computer users. More than 80% people using computers for more than 4 h complain of back pain. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of multidisciplinary treatment approach and conventional treatment approach amongst computer users. Materials and Methods: A prospective interventional study was carried out at a private spine clinic amongst the computer users with the complaint of low back pain. The study participants were randomly distributed in two groups. The first group comprised the study participants treated by conventional approach and the second group was treated by multidisciplinary approach. Primary outcomes analyzed were pain intensity, sick leave availed, and quality of life. Statistical analysis was done using proportions, unpaired " t " test, and Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Results: Totally 44 study participants were randomly assigned to groups I and II, and each group had 22 study participants. Intensity of pain was reduced significantly in the group treated by multidisciplinary approach ( t = 5.718; P = 0.0001). Similarly only 4 (19.19%) of the study participants of the group treated by multidisciplinary approach availed sick leave due to low back pain, while 14 (63.63%) study participants availed sick leave in the other group ( P = 0.02). The quality of life amongst the study participants treated by multidisciplinary approach was significantly improved compared to the group treated by conventional approach ( t = 7.037; P = 0.0001). Conclusion and Recommendation: The multidisciplinary treatment approach was better than the conventional treatment approach in low back pain cases when some factors like pain and quality of life were assessed. The multidisciplinary approach for treatment of low back pain should be promoted over conventional approach. Larger studies are required to confirm the findings in different settings.

Background : Poly trauma is a major killer. Team work is essential for better management. Method : Survey was undertaken to collect baseline data in polytrauma patient. Result : Two thousand patients were studied. Cause was fall in 904, vehicular accident in 776 and assault in 320 patients. Conclusion : There should be good prehospital emergency service and quick transport to equipped hospital.

Background : Proximal tibial fractures involving the condyles are often a matter of debate with regards to surgical management. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of using closed reduction with an eschmarch bandage, gentle hammering, and use of percutaneous cannulated cancellous screws for fixation and buttressing the fracture, as a treatment modality for specific tibial condyle fractures. Methods : We evaluated 90 closed upper end tibia fractures, Schatzker types I, III, and IV, treated with closed reduction using an esmarch bandage and minimally invasive percutaneus fixation with cannulated cancellous screws. Results : We achieved excellent results in 33.3% of the cases, good result in 50%, a fair result in 13.3 %, and a poor result in 3.3 % cases. Conclusion : This minimally invasive modality of treatment of upper end tibia fractures gives satisfactory results. The use of esmarch bandage and gentle hammering to help achieve acceptable reduction has the advantage of being relatively simple and easily reproducible, without the use of any expensive extra medical equipment. The percutaneous fixation with cancellous screws has minimal morbidity. Thus, this is a good modality of treatment of tibial condlyle fractures of Schatzker types I, III and IV.