SEARCH · Search PubMed
Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Professor Ireneusz Wierzejewski was born in 1881. He completed his medical university training in 1908 in Munich. He obtained his doctor degree in 1909 in Lipsk, based on the work "Ueber den kongenitalen ulnadefekt" On the 01.07.1909, thanks to professor Lange's support, he got a permanent post in Berlin - Brandenburgische Kruppel - Heil und Erziehunganstalt, run by Konrad Biesalski. Here he performed the duties of the first assistant in the Institute and director of the orthopedic outpatient department until 15.09.1911. During this period I. Wierzejewski's professional personality formed: he had the chance to become acquainted with the specifics of his supervisors orthopedic thinking and he got to know basic surgical techniques in orthopedics. He was the first Polish professor in orthopedics to set up the first Polish Orthopedic Institute (in Poznan) modeled after Berlin Brandenburgische Kruppel - Heil und Erziehunganstalt. The organization and equipment was similar to K-H-E. This institution was later transformed into the first Polish orthopedic clinic. Just as in the German model, the Orthopedic Institute in Poznan had orthopedic workshops, which at the time was very unique in Poland. Indoctrinated with K. Biesalski idea of caring for the cripples in Germany, he strived to make it a reality in Poland. In his speeches during scientific congresses fought for an act analogous to the Prussian one from 06.05.1920. The time spent working in K. Biesalski's Institute formed the professional and scientific personality of Poland's first professor in orthopedics and indirectly but definitely influenced the creation of Poland's first Orthopedic Clinic.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
This report uses a mathematical modeling system to define optimal orthopedic coverage for trauma centers. Data from 2,325 patients treated with emergency orthopedic operations within 24 hours of admission at 78 randomly sampled and at four totally sampled verified centers were used to create a profile of (1) admission by month, day, and hour; (2) operation times; and (3) operation duration. The reason for operation included (1) open fracture or crush (809 patients); (2) irreducible dislocations (164 patients); (3) fracture with vascular injury (seven patients); (4) dislocation with vascular injury (17 patients); (5) compartment syndrome (11 patients); (6) femoral neck fracture in young patients (36 patients); (7) combination of categories 1 to 6 (70 patients); (8) fracture with multiple injuries (171 patients); and (9) urgent not emergent (1,040 patients). The program defined the frequency that an injured patient needing an orthopedic consult would wait beyond 30 minutes because the orthopedic surgeon was doing a trauma related operation at a center with one or two orthopedic surgeons on call. The probability that a patient cannot be seen promptly by one orthopedic surgeon in a center doing 25, 50, 75, 100, 200, and 300 emergency procedures per year is 0.17, 0.74, 1.6, 3.1, 12.5, and 28 patients per year. When two are on call, 1.3 patients, yearly, will wait more than 30 minutes in a center doing 300 emergency procedures. Thus, mandatory orthopedic backup call for a trauma center performing fewer than 100 emergent trauma procedures within 24 hours is unwarranted.
PURPOSE: To compare the occurrence at magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of clinically important knee abnormalities in patients referred by orthopedic surgeons with that in patients referred by other physicians. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Knee MR images in all patients referred for evaluation of internal derangement for 12 months were retrospectively reviewed. Meniscus, ligament, and articular cartilage abnormalities were tabulated. The numbers of abnormalities detected in the patients referred by orthopedic surgeons were compared with those in the patients referred by all other physicians by using chi(2) analysis. Significance was defined at P less than .05. RESULTS: Knee MR images in 439 patients were reviewed; 328 patients were referred by orthopedic surgeons, and 111 were referred by other physicians. There was no significant difference in the rates of occurrence of meniscus tear (149 [45%; orthopedic surgeon referrals] vs 50 [45%; other physician referrals], P = .96); ligament tear (82 [25%] vs 21 [19%], P = .25); isolated hyaline cartilage defect (77 [23%] vs 20 [18%], P = .29); meniscus or ligament tear (167 [51%] vs 55 [50%], P = .86); or meniscus, ligament, or articular cartilage tear (242 [74%] vs 72 [65%], P = .34). The proportion of patients who subsequently underwent surgery of the knee was also similar (39% [118 of 300] vs 28% [23 of 82], P = .14). CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in the occurrences of clinically important knee internal derangement at MR imaging between patients referred by orthopedic surgeons and those referred by other physicians.
As expected, it was found that mainly graphic and tabular methods were used, unless the papers in question were purely descriptions of methods or brief case reports. This is probably connected with the long courses of orthopedic conditions, which, with a reasonable investment in time, can only be studied retrospectively. Nevertheless, it became apparent that the group of prospective studies, though numerically smaller, had by and large been performed quite well. Many of them managed without test statistics and yet have considerable information value. The few reports with test statistics had for the most part also been quite well conducted. The most common sources of errors in these were that too many tests were conducted on the same data material without taking the cumulative probability of error into account, e.g., according to Bonferroni-Holm; and the test method used was often not mentioned. So some good statistical studies in orthopedics are certainly being published, albeit gradually. It is planned to conduct a similar investigation on the same years' issues of a German-language journal in another specialty included in the list mentioned at the beginning--German to avoid the bias of translation. Afterwards the two studies can be compared to establish whether an orthopedic journal cannot also be included in the list of the 200. The necessity of impeccable statistics for practice and research is undisputed. The results presented here are intended to encourage orthopedists to attempt prospective studies more frequently than hitherto, and, keeping the test preconditions in mind, also to use correctly described, conclusive statistics.
The goal of the present paper is to compare the rules used in Germany and Poland to establish an individual's eligibility for a disability pension in cases of orthopedic disorders. Harmonizing these rules is one of the basic factors needed to create the proper platform for cooperation among health care systems in all the countries associated with the European Union. This second part of the work will discuss the Polish rules for eligibility proceedings in orthopedic cases. The example of spinal disorders is used to explain the format for the examination conducted by an orthopedic specialist in the course of the process of determining the disability group to which the person belongs.
The aim of the present paper is to compare the rules used in Germany and Poland to establish an individual's eligibility for a disability pension in cases of orthopedic disorders. Harmonizing these rules is one of the basic factors needed to create the proper platform for cooperation among health care systems in all the countries associated with the European Union. This first part of the work discusses the German rules for eligibility proceedings in orthopedic cases. The example of spinal disorders is used to explain the scheme of the examination conducted by the specialist to determine the disability group to which the person should belong. Attention is drawn to the rules governing the use of additional tests and eligibility proceedings.
During forty-five years (1946-1991) over 6000 children were treated conservatively and over 6000 surgical procedures for congenital dislocation of the hip were carried out at Orthopedic Department of Institute of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation in Poznań. Modalities of treatment, types and numbers of operations are presented.
We surveyed 178 orthopedic physicians in the Washington, DC, area to ascertain the effect on patient care of previous education in the area of drug and alcohol issues. The return rate was 75%. Of the respondents, 99% were male, average age was 46.7 years (+/- 9.3), and average number of years in practice was 15.2 (+/- 9.6). A majority of respondents indicated that they did not have training in the abuse potential of analgesics (92 [69%]), characteristics of benzodiazepine abuse (77 [58%]), or when to seek the assistance of an addiction medicine specialist for patients with chronic pain (106 [80%]). Only 41 (31%) of the orthopedists indicated that they inquire about alcohol and drug use before prescribing opiates for more than a week. We offer suggestions for self-education for interested physicians.
The rules of writing accurate and profound-diagnoses in orthopedics and traumatology were presented. The most common mistakes were pointed out. An attention was paid to the eponyms. Latin language and correct vocabulary.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.