Search results for: shoulder

Authors: Patricia Shirley Almeida Prado, Selma Paixão Argollo, Maria De Fátima Teixeira Guimarães, Leticia Matos Sobrinho

Abstract:

Skeletal differential diagnosis is essential in forensic anthropology in order to differentiate skeletal trauma from normal osseous variation and pathological processes. Thus, part of forensic anthropological field is differentiate skeletal criminal injuries from the normal skeletal variation (bone fusion or nonunion, transitional vertebrae and other non-metric traits), non-traumatic skeletal pathology (myositis ossificans, arthritis, bone metastasis, osteomyelitis) from traumatic skeletal pathology (myositis ossificans traumatic) avoiding misdiagnosis. This case shows the importance of effective pathological diagnosis in order to accelerate the identification process of skeletonized human remains. THE CASE: An unidentified skeletal remains at the medico legal institute Nina Rodrigues-Salvador, of a male young adult (29 to 40 years estimated) showing a massive heterotopic ossification on its right tibia at upper epiphysis and adjacent articular femur surface; an extensive ossification on the right clavicle (at the sternal extremity) also presenting an heterotopic ossification at right scapulae (upper third of scapulae lateral margin and infraglenoid tubercule) and at the head of right humerus at the shoulder joint area. Curiously, this case also shows an unusual porosity in certain vertebrae´s body and in some tarsal and carpal bones. Likewise, his left fifth metacarpal bones (right and left) showed a healed fracture which led both bones distorted. Based on identification, of pathological conditions in human skeletal remains literature and protocols these alterations can be misdiagnosed and this skeleton may present more than one pathological process. The anthropological forensic lab at Medico-legal Institute Nina Rodrigues in Salvador (Brazil) adopts international protocols to ancestry, sex, age and stature estimations, also implemented well-established conventions to identify pathological disease and skeletal alterations. The most compatible diagnosis for this case is hematogenous osteomyelitis due to following findings: 1: the healed fracture pattern at the clavicle showing a cloaca which is a pathognomonic for osteomyelitis; 2: the metacarpals healed fracture does not present cloaca although they developed a periosteal formation. 3: the superior articular surface of the right tibia shows an extensive inflammatory healing process that extends to adjacent femur articular surface showing some cloaca at tibia bone disease. 4: the uncommon porosities may result from hematogenous infectious process. The fractures probably have occurred in a different moments based on the healing process; the tibia injury is more extensive and has not been reorganized, while metacarpals and clavicle fracture is properly healed. We suggest that the clavicle and tibia´s fractures were infected by an existing infectious disease (syphilis, tuberculosis, brucellosis) or an existing syndrome (Gorham’s disease), which led to the development of osteomyelitis. This hypothesis is supported by the fact that different bones are affected in diverse levels. Like the metacarpals that do not show the cloaca, but then a periosteal new bone formation; then the unusual porosities do not show a classical osteoarthritic processes findings as the marginal osteophyte, pitting and new bone formation, they just show an erosive process without bone formation or osteophyte. To confirm and prove our hypothesis we are working on different clinical approaches like DNA, histopathology and other image exams to find the correct diagnostic.

Keywords: bone disease, forensic anthropology, hematogenous osteomyelitis, human identification, human remains

Procedia PDF Downloads 316

Authors: Tianqiao Zhang, Ye Tian, Yanliang Yin, Yichao Tian, Suzhai Tian, Weige Sun, Shuhui Gong, Limei Tang, Ruoliang Tang

Abstract:

Introduction: Healthcare workers, especially the nurses all over the world, are highly vulnerable to work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs), experiencing high rates of neck, shoulder, and low back injuries, due to the unfavorable working conditions. To reduce WMSDs among nursing personnel, many workplace interventions have been developed and implemented. Unfortunately, the ongoing Covid-19 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has posed great challenges to the ergonomic practices and interventions in healthcare facilities, particularly the hospitals, since current Covid-19 mitigation measures, such as social distancing and working remotely, has substantially minimized in-person gatherings and trainings. On the other hand, hospitals throughout the world have been short-staffed, resulting in disturbance of shift scheduling and more importantly, the increased job demand among the available caregivers, particularly the doctors and nurses. With the latest development in communication technology, remote intervention measures have been developed as an alternative, without the necessity of in-person meetings. The Omaha System (OS) is a standardized classification system for nursing practices, including a problem classification system, an intervention system, and an outcome evaluation system. This paper describes the development of an OS-based ergonomic intervention program. Methods: First, a comprehensive literature search was performed among worldwide electronic databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), between journal inception to May 2020, resulting in a total of 1,418 scientific articles. After two independent screening processes, the final knowledge pool included eleven randomized controlled trial studies to develop the draft of the intervention program with Omaha intervention subsystem as the framework. After the determination of sample size needed for statistical power and the potential loss to follow-up, a total of 94 nurses from eight clinical departments agreed to provide written, informed consent to participate in the study, which were subsequently assigned into two random groups (i.e., intervention vs. control). A subgroup of twelve nurses were randomly selected to participate in a semi-structured interview, during which their general understanding and awareness of musculoskeletal disorders and potential interventions was assessed. Then, the first draft was modified to reflect the findings from these interviews. Meanwhile, the tentative program schedule was also assessed. Next, two rounds of consultation were conducted among experts in nursing management, occupational health, psychology, and rehabilitation, to further adjust and finalize the intervention program. The control group had access to all the information and exercise modules at baseline, while an interdisciplinary research team was formed and supervised the implementation of the on-line intervention program through multiple social media groups. Outcome measures of this comparative study included biomechanical load assessed by the Quick Exposure Check and stresses due to awkward body postures. Results and Discussion: Modification to the draft included (1) supplementing traditional Chinese medicine practices, (2) adding the use of assistive patient handling equipment, and (3) revising the on-line training method. Information module should be once a week, lasting about 20 to 30 minutes, for a total of 6 weeks, while the exercise module should be 5 times a week, each lasting about 15 to 20 minutes, for a total of 6 weeks.

Keywords: ergonomic interventions, musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs), omaha system, nurses, Covid-19

Procedia PDF Downloads 155