Search

Introduction: Digital technology has the potential to provide a bias‐free evaluation instrument for practical examination grading. E4D Compare software was designed for teaching institutions to allow comparison between scanned models prepared by students and master models prepared by instructors. The aim of this study was to determine the tolerance value for the E4D compare software (E4D Technologies LLC, Richardson, TX, USA) that provides scores comparable with faculty grades for wax‐ups #23 and #19. Additionally, this study sought to assess the correlation between students' self‐assessments, visual and digital grades and the reliability of the software. Methods: Student wax‐ups (n = 112) were uploaded into the software and then compared with faculty‐generated master wax‐ups. Digital grading was performed at tolerances 200–800 μm in 50 μm increments and was repeated twice. Results: A tolerance of 350 μm was the closest to faculty grades for #23 and 500 μm was the closest for #19. Visual and digital grades showed moderate to high correlation for both wax‐ups. Correlations between students' self‐assessments and visual and digital grades improved with #19 versus #23. A near‐perfect correlation was found between grades at the first and second digital grading sessions. Conclusions: The tolerance that closely matches faculty grades differs according to the tooth type. The software provided consistent grades and correlated well with faculty grades. Students' self‐assessment skills improved as they proceeded throughout the course. Further studies are necessary to ascertain the role of the software in improving students' self‐assessment skills. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Supervised physical therapy is the recommended care for an ankle sprain. Yet, recent evidence indicates some ankle sprain patients may not receive the recommended care, and instead, prescribed medication to alleviate symptoms. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to describe the percentage of patients reporting to an office-based physician in the U.S. that were or were not referred to physical therapy. Secondly, to describe the percentage of ankle sprain patients with or without medication administered, supplied or ordered. This was a secondary analysis of the cross-sectional National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) from 2007 to 2016. The NAMCS is a multi-stage probability sample survey of visits to office-based physicians. The percentage and associated 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for visits that had a physical therapy referral or a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), opioid and non-opioid analgesics administered, supplied or ordered. Sampled data were weighted to produce national-level estimates. A physical therapy referral was given for 16.8% (95% CI: 13.2, 21.2) of ankle sprain visits. Approximately 34.5% (95%CI: 30.5, 38.7) of all ankle sprain visits had a medication administered, supplied or ordered. NSAIDs (72.1%; 95% CI: 66.9,76.8) and opioids (21.0%; 95% CI: 16.3, 26.5) were the two most common types of medication. NSAIDs and opioid medication combined were administered, supplied or ordered more frequently than a referral to physical therapy. These findings provide evidence that suggests many ankle sprain patients reporting to an office-based physician are not receiving the recommended care; physical therapy. Rather, medication appears to be the primary type of care provided to patients. These data are important because it gives a focused area to improve the treatment of an ankle sprain by developing strategies that ensure all patients are provided the recommended care from the onset of entering the healthcare system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Overuse injuries are common in volleyball; however, few studies exist that quantify the workload of a volleyball athlete in a season. The relationship between workload and shoulder injury has not been extensively studied in women's collegiate volleyball athletes. Hypothesis/Purpose: This study aims to quantify shoulder workloads by counting overhead swings during practice and matches. The purpose of the current study is to provide a complete depiction of typical overhead swings, serves, and hits, which occur in both practices and matches. The primary hypothesis was that significantly more swings will occur in practices compared to matches. The secondary hypothesis was that greater swing volume and greater musculoskeletal injury frequency will occur in the pre-season than during the season. Study Design: Prospective cohort Methods: Researchers observed practice and match videos and counted overhead serves and attacks of 19 women's collegiate volleyball players for two seasons. Serves, overhead hits, and total swings (serves + hits) were the dependent variables; event (matches and practice) along with position (defensive specialists, setter, outside hitter, and middle blocker) were the independent variables. Musculoskeletal injury frequency and swing volume workload were compared across pre-season and competitive season time periods. Results: Across all positions except outside hitters twice as many total swings occurred in practices compared to matches (p=.002) resulting in an average of 19 (CI95 16.5, 21.5) more swings in practice than in matches. The average number of total swings during the pre-season 47.1 (CI95 44.1, 50.1) was significantly greater than average swings per session during the competitive season 37.7 (CI95 36.4, 38.9) (p <0.001) resulting in a mean difference of 9.4 (CI95 6.1, 12.7) swings. The number of athletes limited in participation or out due to a musculoskeletal injury during the pre-season (2.9%) was greater than during the season (1.1%) (p=0.042). Conclusion: These findings support the primary hypothesis that women's collegiate volleyball athletes swing more during practices than in matches. The higher average number of serves in the pre-season and the greater frequency of musculoskeletal injuries requiring participation restriction or removal from participation suggest that a concordant relationship may exist between workload and injury variables. Level of Evidence: 2 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Students with disabilities receive school-based physical therapy services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004. Little research exists regarding therapy services in schools. Objective This study explored the school-based services that students received and the activities and interventions that physical therapists implemented, and determined if services differed based on the student's functional gross motor ability and age. Design This was a prospective observational cohort study using a practice-based evidence design. Methods Data were collected by 109 physical therapists for 296 students, aged 5 to 12 years, receiving school-based physical therapy. Physical therapists completed the School-Physical Therapy Interventions for Pediatrics data form for 20 weeks during 1 school year. This evaluation included the type of service delivery, the amount of time spent on each student (consultation/documentation), minutes spent in activities, the specific interventions implemented, and the student's level of participation. The Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) was used to describe the students' functional ability. Results Physical therapists provided an average of 26.7 min/wk (standard deviation [SD] = 15.1) of direct services and 13.1 min/wk (SD = 7.7) of services on behalf of the student. Primary activities were physical education/recreation (7.7 min/wk, SD = 8.2), mobility (6.7 min/wk, SD = 7.9), and sitting/standing/transitions (6.3 min/wk, SD = 8.1). Primary interventions were neuromuscular (32.5 counts per student, SD = 15.9), mobility (15.3 counts per student, SD = 14.65), and musculoskeletal (14.4 counts per student, SD = 10.3). Differences existed based on GMFCS but not student age. Limitations Physical therapists reported School-Physical Therapy Interventions for Pediatrics data weekly, not necessarily after each therapy session. The GMFCS was used as a proxy of students' functional gross motor ability. Conclusions Our description of services is provided to encourage physical therapists to reflect on the services they provide and to foster future examinations of service effectiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]