Activity

To evaluate the effect of fascia penetration and develop a new technique for lateral femoral cutaneous nerve (LFCN) conduction studies based on the fascia penetration point (PP) identified using ultrasound.

The fascia PP of the LFCN was localized in 20 healthy subjects, and sensory nerve action potentials (SNAPs) were obtained at four different stimulation points-2 cm proximal to the PP (2PPP), PP, 2 cm distal to the PP (2DPP), and 4 cm distal to the PP (4DPP). We compared the stimulation technique based on the fascia penetration point (STBFP) with the conventional technique.

The SNAP amplitude of the LFCN was significantly higher when stimulation was performed at the PP and 2DPP than at other stimulation points. Using the STBFP, SNAP responses were elicited in 38 of 40 legs, whereas they were elicited in 32 of 40 legs using the conventional technique (p=0.041). STBFP had a comparable SNAP amplitude and slightly delayed negative peak latency compared to the conventional technique. In terms of the time required, the time spent on STBFP showed a more consistent distribution than the time spent on the conventional technique (two-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, p<0.05).

SNAP of the LFCN significantly changed near the fascia PP, and stimulation at PP and at 2DPP provided high amplitudes. STBFP can help increase the response rate and ensure stable and consistent procedure time of the LFCN conduction study.

SNAP of the LFCN significantly changed near the fascia PP, and stimulation at PP and at 2DPP provided high amplitudes. STBFP can help increase the response rate and ensure stable and consistent procedure time of the LFCN conduction study.

To determine the most optimal needle insertion point of extensor indicis (EI) using ultrasound.

A total 80 forearms of 40 healthy volunteers were recruited. We identified midpoint (MP) of EI using ultrasound and set MP as optimal needle insertion point. The location of MP was suggested using distances from landmarks. Distance from MP to medial border of ulna (MP-X) and to lower margin of ulnar head (MP-Y) were measured. Ratios of MP-X to Forearm circumference (X ratio) and MP-Y to forearm length (Y ratio) were calculated. In cross-sectional view, depth of MP (Dmp), defined as middle value of superficial depth (Ds) and deep depth (Dd) was measured and suggested as proper depth of needle insertion.

Mean MP-X was 1.37±0.14 cm and mean MP-Y was 5.50±0.46 cm. Mean X ratio was 8.10±0.53 and mean Y ratio was 22.15±0.47. Mean Dmp was 7.63±0.96 mm.

We suggested that novel optimal needle insertion point of the EI. It is about 7.6 mm in depth at about 22% of the forearm length proximal from the lower margin of the ulnar head and about 8.1% of the forearm circumference radial from medial border of ulna.

We suggested that novel optimal needle insertion point of the EI. It is about 7.6 mm in depth at about 22% of the forearm length proximal from the lower margin of the ulnar head and about 8.1% of the forearm circumference radial from medial border of ulna.

To identify the prevalence and characteristics of neuropathic pain (NP) in patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) and to investigate associations between NP and demographic or disease-related variables.

We retrospectively reviewed medical records of patients with SCI whose pain was classified according to the International Spinal Cord Injury Pain classifications at a single hospital. Multiple statistical analyses were employed. Patients aged <19 years, and patients with other neurological disorders and congenital conditions were excluded.

Of 366 patients, 253 patients (69.1%) with SCI had NP. Patients who were married or had traumatic injury or depressive mood had a higher prevalence rate. selleck screening library When other variables were controlled, marital status and depressive mood were found to be predictors of NP. There was no association between the prevalence of NP and other demographic or clinical variables. The mean Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) of NP was 4.52, and patients mainly described pain as tingling, squeezing, and painful cold. Females and those with below-level NP reported more intense pain. An NRS cut-off value of 4.5 was determined as the most appropriate value to discriminate between patients taking pain medication and those who did not.

In total, 69.1% of patients with SCI complained of NP, indicating that NP was a major complication. Treatment planning for patients with SCI and NP should consider that marital status, mood, sex, and pain subtype may affect NP, which should be actively managed in patients with an NRS ≥4.5.

In total, 69.1% of patients with SCI complained of NP, indicating that NP was a major complication. Treatment planning for patients with SCI and NP should consider that marital status, mood, sex, and pain subtype may affect NP, which should be actively managed in patients with an NRS ≥4.5.

To compare the efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on upper limb function recovery among patients who recently had stroke.

Subjects with recent stroke (within 1 month) were randomized to rTMS (n=25) and tDCS (n=26) applied over the non-lesioned hemisphere for three sessions per week, followed by tailored upper limb rehabilitation training for a total of 2 weeks. The primary outcomes were changes in the Motor Assessment Scale (MAS), Fugl-Meyer arm score test, Nine-Hole Peg Test (9HPT), hand grip strength, and modified Barthel Index at weeks 2 and 4. Both therapists responsible for training and assessment were blinded to the intervention allocated.

There was an improvement in all the motor performance scales among both groups (p<0.001). These improvements persisted at discharge. However, there was no significant difference in any of the assessment scales between the two groups. The rTMS group showed a statistically non-significant greater improvement in MAS, 9HPT, and handgrip strength than the tDCS group.

Both interventions produce a statistically significant improvement in upper limb function. There was no statistically significant difference between the two intervention methods with respect to motor performance. It is suggested that a larger study may help to clarify the superiority of either methods.

Both interventions produce a statistically significant improvement in upper limb function. There was no statistically significant difference between the two intervention methods with respect to motor performance. It is suggested that a larger study may help to clarify the superiority of either methods.