Prognosis of trochanteric pain in primary care

BACKGROUND: Trochanteric pain is the second most important diagnosis of hip problems presenting in primary care, but its incidence and prognosis in this context is largely unknown. AIM: To determine the 1- and 5-year prognoses of trochanteric pain and the predictive variables for consistent complaints. DESIGN OF THE STUDY: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: One hundred and sixty-four patients (mean age = 55 years, 80% female) with incidental trochanteric pain in the years 1996 or 2000 were asked in 2001 for past and present symptoms of trochanteric pain. Therapeutic interventions, demographic factors and comorbidity were also investigated. METHOD: The databases of 39 GPs were screened in order to identify all incident cases with a suspicion of trochanteric pain in the years 1996 or 2000. These cases were sent a questionnaire. RESULTS: The incidence of trochanteric pain in primary care is 1.8 patients per 1000 per year. After 1 year at least 36% still suffered from trochanteric pain, and after 5 years this was 29%. Patients with osteoarthritis (OA) in the lower limbs had a 4.8-fold risk of persistent symptoms after 1 year, as compared to patients without OA. Patients who had received a corticosteroid injection had a 2.7-fold chance of recovery after 5 years, as compared with patients who had not received an injection. CONCLUSION: Trochanteric pain is shown to be a chronic disease in a substantial number of patients. The disorder is associated with much impairment when conducting daily activities.     

The whole leg radiograph

The whole leg radiograph (WLR), the standard technique for determining axial alignment, is usually taken in a standing position, although some prefer the supine position. To determine the difference between these two positions, we performed a standing and a supine WLR in 20 patients with a varus alignment. We found an average of 2 degrees more varus deviation in the standing position than in the supine position.     

Structural spinal abnormalities on MRI and associations with weight status in a general pediatric population

BACKGROUND CONTEXTSeveral spinal abnormalities have been studied using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). However, in children these studies were sparsely performed in general populations. Examining young children's spines is important since the shape of the bone is largely determined during the growth spurt. Furthermore, it is so far unknown if associations between weight status and spinal abnormalities, which are known for adolescents and adults, are already present in young children.PURPOSEWe aimed to present the prevalence of structural abnormalities in the prepubertal pediatric spine on MRI and their association with measures of the children's body weight and body composition.STUDY DESIGNCross-sectional study embedded in a prospective population-based birth cohort study.PATIENT SAMPLEFor this study, participants from the Generation R Study were selected based on the availability of MRI data of the lumbar spine and accelerometry data at the age of 9 years.OUTCOME MEASURESThe presence of structural abnormalities of intervertebral discs and vertebrae was scored on MRI. The body mass index-standard deviation [BMI-SD] score was calculated from objectively measured weight and height, and body composition measurements were obtained by a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scan.METHODSA semiquantitative scoring tool to assess the intervertebral discs and vertebrae of the lumbar spine on conventional MRI was designed for this purpose. Proportions of children with spinal abnormalities on at least one lumbar vertebral level were presented. Logistic regression was used to analyze associations between abnormalities and weight and body composition. We declare not to have any financial conflicts of interests.RESULTSWe included 559 children (median age of 9.88 years (interquartile range 6.74–10.02), 48.5% boys). Most frequently observed abnormalities of the intervertebral discs were abnormal signal intensity (24.9%), decreased or collapsed disc height (37.6%), disc bulging (73.3%), and abnormal nuclear shape (29.1%). Vertebral endplate irregularities and lumbosacral transitional vertebrae were seen in respectively 40% and 9.3% of the participants. Except for disc bulging, all abnormalities were predominantly present at the L5 level. Only the presence of endplate irregularities was associated with a higher body weight (BMI SD score (odds ratio [OR] 1.50 [95% confidence interval [CI] 1.21–1.86]) and BMI SD change (OR 1.48 [95% CI 1.07–2.03])) and increased body mass values in body composition measurements (% body fat (OR 1.05 [95% CI 1.02–1.09), fat mass index (OR 1.23 [95% CI 1.09–1.39]), and fat-free mass index (OR 1.30 [95% CI 1.06–1.59])) in adjusted analyses.CONCLUSIONSStructural spinal abnormalities, especially disc bulging, endplate irregularities, and an abnormal disc height, are already present in children aged 9 years from a Dutch population-based cohort. Of those abnormalities, endplate irregularities are associated with various weight and body composition measurements.     

Is Anesthetic Hip Joint Injection Useful in Diagnosing Hip Osteoarthritis? A Meta-Analysis of Case Series

To assess the diagnostic value of intra-articular anesthetic hip injection in patients with hip pain atypical for osteoarthritis (OA), literature was searched. Included were studies assessing the diagnostic value of anesthetic hip injections in differentiating between pain caused by OA or another source. Pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Of the 1387 potentially eligible articles, nine case series with high risk of bias could be included. The pooled sensitivity was 0.97 (95% CI 0.87, 0.99). Specificity was 0.91 (95% CI 0.83, 0.95). For clinical practice, no recommendation can be made regarding the use of hip injections for diagnosing hip OA. High quality, accurately reported studies are needed to provide better evidence on the diagnostic role of hip injection.     

Effectiveness of diclofenac versus paracetamol in knee osteoarthritis: a randomised controlled trial in primary care

Background

The effectiveness of diclofenac versus paracetamol in primary care patients with pain caused by knee osteoarthritis is unclear.

Aim

To assess the effectiveness of diclofenac compared with paracetamol over a period of 2, 4, and 12 weeks in patients with knee osteoarthritis.

Design and setting

Randomised controlled trial in general practice.

Method

There were 104 patients included in the study, they were aged ≥45 years consulting their GP with knee pain caused by knee osteoarthritis. Patients were randomly allocated to diclofenac (n = 52) or paracetamol (n = 52) for at least 2 weeks. Primary outcomes were daily knee pain severity, and knee pain and function measured with the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS).

Results

Over a period of 2- and 4-weeks follow-up, no significant difference in daily knee pain was found between the patient groups: estimated differences of 0.5 (95% CI = −0.2 to 1.3) and −0.2 (95% CI = −1.0 to 0.7), respectively. Over the 12-weeks follow-up, no significant differences were found between both groups for KOOS pain: estimated difference of −2.8 (95% CI = −10.7 to 5.1) and KOOS function of −2.7 (−10.6 to 5.0).

Conclusion

Over a period of 2- and 4-weeks follow-up no significant difference in daily measured knee pain severity was found between primary care patients with knee osteoarthritis taking paracetamol or diclofenac. Also, over a period of 12-weeks follow-up no significant differences were found regarding KOOS pain and KOOS function between both groups. Patients more frequently reported minor adverse events after taking diclofenac (64%) than paracetamol (46%).