Federal employees face the same injury risks as those in the private industry and different areas of the public sector. Those risks can be serious. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reports that approximately 124 federal employees suffered fatal accidents in 2013.
Based on the BLS, the top causes of fatal injuries among workers are:
A federal worker who suffers a job-related private injury or illness (or even families of these employees who have been lost) can seek benefits through the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act (FECA). These benefits include coverage of wages that are lost because of permanent or temporary disability. They also have death benefits for eligible survivors.
The following is a closer look at the most common leading causes of accidents among federal employees:
Transportation Incidents
Many federal jobs require travel between offices or even as a main function of the job. Postal work is the apparent example. Truck and car accidents, which are usually as a result of driver error, can be fatal or result in serious injury. In cases where another driver is at a motor vehicle’s error caused an accident or fault, a worker may consider filing an injury claim in addition to seeking workers’ compensation benefits.
Violence
Unfortunately, federal employees may also be hurt by violence. Incidents of violence include attacks by other creatures and dogs as a cause of harm. In acts of violence, the perpetrator or an animal’s owner may also be held responsible for the employee’s injury, which adds to compensation for the employee’s losses.
Struck by Object or Equipment
There are many ways from being struck by an object or equipment, a worker can suffer a head injury, eye injury, fracture, internal organ injury, cut, bruise or alternative injury. By way of instance, materials and tools can drop from above in a storeroom or roll off a truck. Material stacked can collapse. Debris could be ejected by means of a power tool. By, or a man who excursions can fall and hit at them, make them fall and be hurt.
Falls, Trips or Slips
Slipping or tripping onto a floor or falling off a ladder, scaffolding is a common source of injury in all walks of life. Falls can lead to broken bones, brain injuries, back and spine injuries and much more. In the workplace, using scaling ladders, step stools or other gear puts a worker in danger of falling. Meanwhile, as workers leave equipment or leave slippery and moist floors, this can result in falling accidents.
Harmful Substance Exposure
From being exposed to certain harmful substances such as chemicals, A worker can suffer catastrophic injuries such as burns. A worker may also create health issues from repeated exposure to asbestos, smoke, diesel exhaust or other dangerous substances.
Fire and Explosions
Compressed gases, flammable liquids, open-flames and chemicals are fire and explosion risks. At car depots with petrol or gasoline pumps for automobiles, trucks or equipment, fuel can be ignited. Some metals and synthetic substances that are organic in addition to many natural can form. Third-and-fourth-degree burns, if survived, typically require treatment that includes several surgeries and rehab and leave the sufferer disabled.
Caught-in / Caught-between Accidents
Employees involved in “captured” accidents can endure fractures and tearing accidents if their body parts or clothes become caught in machinery, or even when the worker is crushed between objects or torn from moving components. Caught-in accidents consist of trench, excavation or construction collapses, which may cause devastating injuries in addition to injuries.
Overexertion
Pressure and the stress from overexertion can harm nerves muscles and tendons in the neck, upper extremities and back. Work activities which can result in such musculoskeletal injuries include lifting, pushing, pulling, carrying and holding materials, tools and other objects. They can also be caused by bending, reaching working in awkward body positions and doing similar jobs repetitively or the exact same. Employees can suffer harms that cause numbness, swelling and debilitating pain and sprains, strains, tears, pinched nerves, herniated discs, hernia, carpal or tarsal tunnel syndrome.
Electrocution / Shock
Workers who come into contact may suffer electrocution, which can be death, or jolt, which encircles burns and other accidents caused . Electrical currents can also cause explosions, fires, arc flash and arc blast — each of which might cause burn injuries. Shock and electrocution may be caused by contact with bare wires , damaged fixtures, overhead power lines or faulty equipment or gear.
Seek Federal Benefits
It can be difficult for people people who have never before applied to document a federal workers’ compensation or disability benefits claim. The principles regulating benefits available to employees are lengthy and complicated. Workers who are eligible for numerous advantages may realize that they offset each other, so your total benefit might be less than what you deserve if your claim is organised improperly.
Various experts will allow you to sort through the confusion and work to pursue the advantages or reimbursement you deserve. They can work throughout the country with federal employees.
The scope of our information is limited to chiropractic and spinal injuries and conditions. To discuss options on the subject matter, please feel free to ask Dr. Jimenez or contact us at 915-850-0900 .�
Back pain is one of the most common symptoms reported among the general population. While back pain can occur due to a variety of injuries and/or underlying conditions, a work accident has often been associated as a frequent origin of back pain issues. Back pain can affect an individual at least once throughout their lifetime. Fortunately, federal employees who experience back pain, such as symptoms of sciatica, can benefit from programs like FECA.
Two surgeons discuss the diagnosis and treatment of acromioclavicular injuries in athletes. El Paso, TX. Chiropractor, Dr. Alexander Jimenez follows the discussion.
Acromioclavicular (AC) joint injuries most often occur in athletic young adults involved in collision sports, throwing sports, along with overhead activities like upper-extremity strength training. They account for 3% of all shoulder injuries and 40% of shoulder sports injuries. Athletes in their second and third decade of life are more often affected(1), and men are injured more commonly than women (5:1 to 10:1)(1,2).
Acromioclavicular dislocation was known as early as 400 BC by Hippocrates(3). He cautioned against mistaking it for glenohumeral (shoulder joint) dislocation and advocated treating with a compressive bandage in an attempt to hold the distal (outer) end of the clavicle in a diminished position. Almost 600 decades later Galen (129 AD) recognized his own acromioclavicular dislocation, which he sustained while wrestling(3). He left the tight bandage holding the clavicle down as it was too uneasy. In today’s era this injury is better known, but its treatment remains a source of fantastic controversy.
Anatomy
The acromioclavicular joint combines the collarbone to the shoulder blade and therefore links the arm to the axial skeleton. The articular surfaces are originally hyaline cartilage, which affects to fibrocartilage toward the end of adolescence. The average joint size is 9mm by 19mm(4). The acromioclavicular joint contains an intra-articular, fibrocartilaginous disc which may be complete or partial (meniscoid). This helps absorb forces in compression. There is marked variability in the plane of the joint.
Stabilizers
There is little inherent bony stability in the AC joint. Stability is provided by the dynamic stabilizers — namely, the anterior deltoid muscle arising from the clavicle and the trapezius muscle arising from the acromion.
Additionally, there are ligamentous stabilizers. The AC ligaments are divided into four — superior, inferior, anterior and posterior. The superior is most powerful and blends with muscles. The acromioclavicular ligaments contribute around two- thirds of the constraining force to superior and posterior displacement; however, with greater displacement the coracoclavicular ligaments contribute the major share of the resistance. The coracoclavicular ligament consists of the conoid and trapezoid. The conoid ligament is fan-shaped and resists forwards motion of the scapula, while the more powerful trapezoid ligament is level and resists backward movement. The coracoclavicular ligament helps bunch scapular and glenohumeral (shoulder joint) motion and the interspace averages 1.3 cm.
Mechanism Of Injury
The athlete who sustains an acromioclavicular injury commonly reports either one of two mechanisms of harm: direct or indirect.
Direct force: This is when the athlete falls onto the point of the shoulder, with the arm usually at the side and adducted. The force drives the acromion downwards and medially. Nielsen(5) found that 70 percent of acromioclavicular joint injuries are caused by an direct injury.
Indirect force: This is when the athlete falls onto an outstretched arm. The pressure is transmitted via the humeral head into the acromion, therefore the acromioclavicular ligament is disrupted and the coracoclavicular ligament is stretched.
On Examination
The athlete presents soon after the severe injury with his arm splinted to his side. The patient may state that the arm feels better using superiorly directed support on the arm. Most motions are limited secondary to pain near the top of the shoulder; the degree varies with the grade of sprain. The hallmark finding is localized swelling and tenderness over the acromioclavicular joint.
In dislocations, the outer part of the collarbone will appear superiorly displaced using a noticeable step deformity (in fact, it is the shoulder which sags beneath the clavicle). Occasionally, the deformity may only be apparent later, if first muscle spasm reduces acromioclavicular separation. Forced cross-body adduction (yanking the affected arm across the opposite shoulder) provokes discomfort. The clavicle can frequently be moved relative to the acromion.
Acromioclavicular Visualisation
The typical joint width measures 1-3mm. It’s regarded as abnormal if it is more than 7mm in men, and 6mm in women. Routine anteroposterior views of the shoulder reveal the glenohumeral jointnonetheless, that the acromioclavicular joint is over penetrated and so dark to interpret. Reduced exposure enhances visualization. The individual stands with both arms hanging unsupported, both acromioclavicular joints on one film. Weighted viewpoints (stress X-rays) are obtained with 10-15 lb weights not held but suspended from the individual’s wrists. They help differentiate type II-III injuries, but are of little clinical significance and therefore are no longer recommended in our practice.
Classification Of AC Separation
The importance of identifying the injury kind can’t be over emphasized because the treatment and prognosis hinge on an accurate diagnosis. The injuries are graded on the basis of that ligaments are injured and how badly they’re torn.
Allman (6) classified acromioclavicular sprains as grades I, II and III, representing respectively, no involvement, partial tearing, and total disruption of the coracoclavicular ligaments. More recently, Rockwood (1) has further classified the more severe injuries as standard III-VI.
The injuries are classified into six categories:
Type I This is the most common injury encountered. Only a mild force is needed to sustain such an injury. The acromioclavicular ligament is sprained with an intact coracoclavicular ligament. The acromioclavicular joint remains stable and symptoms resolve in seven to 10 days. This injury has an excellent prognosis.
Type II The coracoclavicular ligaments are sprained; however, the acromioclavicular ligaments are ruptured. Most players can return to their sport within three weeks. There is anecdotal evidence to suggest that steroid injections into the acromioclavicular joint speed up the resolution of symptoms, but this practice is not universal.
Type III The acromioclavicular joint capsule and coracoclavicular ligaments are completely disrupted. The coracoclavicular interspace is 25-100% greater than the normal shoulder.
Type IV This is a type III injury with avulsion of the coracoclavicular ligament from the clavicle, with the distal clavicle displaced posteriorly into or through the trapezius.
Type V This is type III but with exaggeration of the vertical displacement of the clavicle from the scapula-coracoclavicular interspace 100-300% greater than the normal side, with the clavicle in a subcutaneous position.
Type VI This is a rare injury. This is type III with inferior dislocation of the lateral end of the clavicle below the coracoid
Treatment
The treatment of acromioclavicular joint injuries varies based on the seriousness or grade of the injury.
Initial treatment: These can be quite painful injuries. Ice packs, anti-inflammatories plus a sling are utilized to immobilize the shoulder and then take the weight of the arm. As pain starts to subside, it is important to start moving the fingers, wrist and elbow to prevent shoulder stiffness. Next, it’s important to begin shoulder motion in order to stop shoulder stiffness.
Un-displaced injuries only require rest, ice, and then a slow return to activity over two to six weeks. Major dislocations require surgical stabilization in athletes if their dominant arm is involved, and if they participate in upper-limb sports
Type I & II: Ice pack, anti-inflammatory agents and a sling are used. Early motion based on symptoms is introduced. Pain usually subsides in about 10 days. Range-of-motion exercises and strength training to restore normal motion and strength are instituted as the patient�s symptoms permit. Some symptoms may be relieved by taping (taking stress off acromioclavicular joint). The length of time needed to regain full motion and function depends upon the severity or grade of the injury. The sport and the position played determine when a player can return to a sporting activity. A football player, who does not have to elevate his arm, can return sooner than a tennis or rugby player. When a patient returns to practice and competition in collision sports, protection of the acromioclavicular joint with special padding is important. A simple �doughnut� cut from foam or felt padding can provide effective protection. Special shoulder- injury pads, or off-the-shelf shoulder orthoses, can be used to protect the acromioclavicular joint after injury.
Some Type II injuries may develop late degenerative joint changes and will need a resection of the distal end of the clavicle for pain relief. It is important to note that after a resection of the distal end of the clavicle, particularly in a throwing athlete, there may be formation of heterotopic bone on the under surface of the clavicle which can cause a painful syndrome which presents like shoulder impingement.
Type III: The treatment of type III injury is less controversial than in past years. In the 1970s, most orthopaedic surgeons recommended surgery for type III acromioclavicular sprains(7). By 1991, most type III injuries were treated conservatively(8). This change in treatment philosophy was prompted by a series of retrospective studies(9). These showed no outcome differences between operative and nonoperative groups.
What’s more, the patients treated non-operatively returned to full activity (work or athletics) earlier than surgically treated groups(10, 11). The exceptions to this recommendation include people who perform repetitive, heavy lifting, people who operate with their arms above 90 degrees, and thin patients who have prominent lateral ends of the clavicles. These patients may benefit from surgical repair(12).
Any discussion about the management of acute injuries to the AC joint must deal with which of the many methods of surgical therapy described is the best for their situation, but whether surgery should be considered at all. Surgery is generally avoided in athletes participating in contact sports since they will often re-injure the shoulder later on.
Type IV-VI: Account for more than 10-15% of total acromioclavicular dislocations and should be managed surgically. Failure to reduce and fix these will lead to chronic pain and dysfunction.
Surgery
Surgical repair can be divided into anatomical or non- anatomical, or historically into four types:
? Coracoclavicular repairs (Bosworth screws(13), cerclage, Copeland and Kessel repair).
? Distal clavicular excision.
? Dynamic muscle transfers.
? Disadvantages of surgery are that there are risks of infection, a longer time to return to full function and continued pain in some cases.
For the individual with a chronic AC joint dislocation or subluxation that remains painful after three to six months of closed treatment and rehabilitation, surgery is indicated to improve functioning and comfort.
For sequelae of untreated type IV-VI, or painful type II and III injuries, the Weaver Dunn technique is advocated. This�entails removing the lateral 2cm of the clavicle and reattaching the acromial end of the coracoacromial ligament to the cut end of the clavicle, thus reducing the clavicle to a more anatomical position.
Postoperatively, the arm is supported in a sling for up to six weeks. Following the first two weeks, the patient is permitted to use the arm for daily activities at waist level. After six weeks, the sling or orthosis is discontinued, overhead actions are allowed, formal passive stretching is instituted, and light stretching using elastic straps is initiated. Stretching and strengthening are begun slowly and gradually. The athlete shouldn’t return to their sport without restriction until full strength and range of motion has been recovered. This usually occurs four to six months following operation.
Conclusion
AC joint injuries are an important source of pain at the shoulder area and have to be assessed carefully. The management of these injuries is nonoperative in the majority of cases. Type I and II injuries are treated symptomatically. The present trend in uncomplicated type III injuries are a non operative strategy. In the event the athlete develops following problems, a delayed reconstruction might be undertaken. In athletes involved in heavy lifting or prolonged overhead activities, surgery may be considered acutely. Type IV-VI injuries are generally treated operatively.
No matter what kind of treatment is chosen, the ultimate purpose is to restore painless function to the wounded AC joint so as to reunite the athlete safely and as quickly as possible back to their sport. It is possible in the vast majority of acromioclavicular joint injuries.
References
Reza Jenabzadeh and Fares Haddad
1. Rockwood CA Jr, Williams GR, Young CD. Injuries of the Acromioclavicular Joint. In CA Rockwood Jr, et al (eds), Fractures in Adults. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 1996; 1341-1431.
2. Dias JJ, Greg PJ. Acromioclavicular Joint Injuries in Sport: Recommendations for Treatment. Sports Medicine 1991; 11: 125-32.
3. Adams FL. The Genuine Works of Hippocrates (Vols 1,2). New York, William Wood 1886.
4. Bosworth BM. Complete Acromioclavicular Dislocation. N Eng J Med 2 41: 221-225,1949.
5. Nielsen WB. Injury to the Acromioclavicular Joint. J Bone Joint Surg 1963; 45B:434-9.
6. Allman FL Jr. Fractures and Ligamentous Injuries of the Clavicle and its Articulation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1967;
49:774- 784.
7. Powers JA, Bach PJ: Acromioclavicular Separations: Closed or Open Treatment? Clin Orthop 1974; 104 (Oct): 213-223
8. Cox JS: Current Methods of Treatment of Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocations. Orthopaedics 1992; 15(9): 1041-1044
9. Clarke HD, Mc Cann PD: Acromioclavicular Joint Injuries. Orthop Clin North Am 2000; 31(2): 177-187
10. Press J, Zuckerman JD, Gallagher M, et al: Treatment of Grade III Acromioclavicular Separations: Operative versus
Nonoperative Management. Bull Hosp Jt Dis 1997;56(2):77-83
11. Galpin RD, Hawkins RJ, Grainger RW: A Comparative Analysis of Operative versus Nonoperative Treatment of Grade III Acromioclavicular Separations. Clin Orthop 1985; 193 (Mar): 150-155
12. Larsen E, Bjerg-Nielsen A, Christensen P: Conservative or Surgical Treatment of AC Dislocation: A Prospective, Controlled, Randomized Study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1986;68(4):552-555
13. Bosworth BM. Complete Acromioclavicular Dislocation. N Engl. J. Med. 241: 221-225,1949.
For many athletes following any major endurance event they will return to their houses, to recover, celebrate, reflect and rebuild to their next career step. Some, like the athlete in this case study will need to now focus attention on delayed decisions concerning whether to go under the knife to sort out a chronic injury.�El Paso, TX’s Injury scientist, Dr. Alexander Jimenez takes a look at the study.
My client has been competing in triathlon for 10 or more years, although his career has included a range of serious injuries which have kept him from races for months on end. In the previous two to three decades, however, he’s enjoyed a sustained period of injury-free training and racing, and has climbed to the peak of the world rankings. But the emergence of hip pain has seen him once more return to the physio’s table.
The triathlete’s accident history highlights a common pattern among sportspeople: 2 tibial stress fractures, a femoral neck stress fracture and a serious ankle sprain — every one of these on his right side. The significant contributing element to the bone stress injuries is a 1.5cm leg-length gap (his right leg is shorter).
He’d first experienced comparable hip pain in 2004; it kept him from running for three months. At that time, nothing was detected on a bone scan or MRI, or so the pain went paralyzed. An intra-articular cortisone injection (CSI) elicited no improvement. The athlete remembers that he chose to train on his painful hip, never allowing the symptoms to settle. The nearest he ever came into an investigation was a hypothesis that he could have a little, undetected, labral lesion.
The present episode of hip pain began initially at night after a hard three-hour bicycle ride. Earlier this, however, he hadn’t cycled for five times. He described his initial symptom as a profound hip tightness (lateral and lateral), together with slight pain in his groin. He was able to continue to train however, was feeling that the hip tightness and pain following both cycling and running (swimming was symptom-free).
A week later his symptoms dramatically worsened when he flew from Australia to Singapore, on his way to a French high- altitude camp. As he got off the airplane, he felt deep hip pain as well as the tightness. As elite athletes tend to do, he coached anyway, running a tricky track session, which made the hip much worse: he was unable to ride or run without pain. He instantly started a course of anti- inflammatories.
I met him in Singapore and evaluated him in the airport, initially ruling out any prospect of a disease or systemic matter. He explained he had been feeling an ache during the night, lying in bed; on waking, the hip would be OK, but got worse the longer he walked.
On assessment, he had the following physical signs:
� walking with obvious limp
� pain on hopping (6/10)
�painful right hip quadrant/impingement test (full hip flexion/adduction)
� reduced right hip flexion (-10 degrees compared to left)
� reduced right hip internal rotation (-10 degrees compared to left)
� increased tone on palpation of TFL, adductors, hip flexors, gluteal, piriformis and deep rotators
� lumbar spine and SIJ were OK
� femoral shaft bone stress test was OK � leg length discrepancy (right side 1.5cm shorter)
� right innominate (pelvis) anteriorly rotated
� weakness in right hip abductors/extensors
� reduced calf endurance on right side (-5 reps)
� ankle dorsiflexion range of movement was OK
� reduced proprioception on right (single leg stance, eyes closed).
I thought the differential diagnoses were:
� femoral neck stress fracture
� labral tear, possibly with hip synovitis
� FAI (femoro-acetabular impingement), possibly with hip synovitis.
I initially treated the triathlete with soft- tissue techniques to reduce the tone around the hip joint. Trigger-point releases were performed on his TFL, adductors, gluteals, piriformis, deep rotators and iliopsoas.�This reduced his jump pain into 3/10. Manual long-leg grip further decreased the strain on hopping (2/10). He still had pain and stiffness on walking but it sensed “simpler. As he prepared to embark on his long run flight to Europe, I counseled him to not sit for too long and maintain his stylish as straight as possible to decrease any potential impingement from hip flexion.
Luckily, the hip didn’t get worse throughout the flight. On arrival at the French high-altitude training centre, we initiated a strategy of two swims and two intensive treatments a day, aiming at reducing muscle tone, restoring his range of hip movement and normal muscle control and stamina. We had been expecting that the problem was not a stress fracture, but just minor hip synovitis that could settle quickly. Following a week of conservative treatment, though, we were just able to keep his hop pain in 2/10, and that he still could not run 20 meters without any pain and limping.
In collaboration with medics, we flew to London to see a sports doctor and get MRI scans. The scans revealed no bone stress reaction, fracture or labral ripping — which was a big relief; however, it did show signs consistent with FAI (femoro-acetabular impingement). He had hip synovitis with a rectal lesion on his femur.
Hip injuries aren’t much reported among triathletes — in fact they are notably absent from reports on Olympic and Ironman triathlons, which mention knee, back, H/ Achilles, lower leg, ankle and shoulder as the most common accidents (1-3).
In this state, when the hip is in maximum flexion and internal rotation, the labrum and cartilage abut and impinge; damage to the articular cartilage and acetabular labrum results from this pathologic bony contact. The contact generally results in a structural abnormality of the femur (“camera impingement”) along with the acetabulum (“pincer impingement”) or a combination of both (“mixed impingement”). Over time, via repetitive micro-trauma, the aggravating motion hurts the hip cartilage or labrum (or both) during normal joint motion. This happens along the anterior femoral neck and the anterior–superior acetabular rim. FAI is a possible trigger of early hip joint degeneration (4).
Arthroscopic surgery is the direction of choice for FAI if symptoms do not settle; however as his next Competition was only three and a half a year off, surgery was not an option. Instead, over a five-day interval, the athlete had two cortisone (CSI) and local anesthetic injections into the hip joint (under ultrasound guidance) to settle the indicators.
Our aim was to grow the hip range of motion and extend the capsule to reduce any additional impingement, slowly returning to regular training. Following the competition, the athlete would then should see a hip arthroscopic surgeon to acquire a surgical opinion to the best option for long-term direction.
Injection Relief
After both shots my customer felt sore for five days. The initial CSI settled his pain on hopping to 1/10 and after seven days he managed to operate without symptoms. But minor hip stiffness and aching at the end of the day prevented him from progressing to optimal training, so that he then underwent a second steroid injection. This settled the hop pain into 0/10 and decreased the aching; so after five times he returned to mild cycling and after seven days he started running again, also.
The athlete admitted that, following the first shot, he had done more and gone tougher in training than directed, as he had felt “good. This mistake of “too much too soon — all too common in elite athletes — had led to excessive inflammation and aching in the hip nightly after training. After the next injection he returned to normal intensity slower and more gradually.
My client built his training up to regular levels by four months following the final injection (swimming five times per week, cycling four days and running six to seven days). He began with very easy cycling on a wind trainer for 30 minutes, building slowly to 90 minutes before cycling on the street. He cycled two days on and one day away and avoided hills to the first two weeks. He started jogging on the apartment for 15 minutes and slowly built up to 90 minutes after three weeks. He did not run hills or about the track; and as he ran only on every single day, he would diligently concentrate on technique.
From week six to week 11, my client remained on anti inflammatory medication and underwent two treatments a day.
The hands-on treatment continued to:
� increase hip range of movement
� stretch the hip capsule
� normalise pelvic symmetry and hip muscle tone
� improve muscle control and strength � improve proprioception
� ensure optimal biomechanics via video assessment (cycling and running).
Eleven weeks after he first felt his hip pain, the triathlete returned to racing; however he failed to finish the first race, partially because of minor hip stiffness but mainly due to “fitness. Fortunately there were not any prolonged symptoms after the race and a week after he successfully returned to competition, coming second in a really strong field. His very minor ongoing symptoms were handled with anti-inflammatory drugs and hands-on treatments.
If this athlete wants to pursue a long- term triathlon career up to the London Olympics, then he will now require surgery. The arthroscopic surgical technique initially assesses the cartilage and labral surfaces, debrides any abnormalities of the hip joint cartilage and hip labrum, removes the non-spherical segments of the femoral head�and any prominent sections of the anterior femoral neck and bony growths on the acetabular rim that may continue to contribute to hip joint impingement.�The alternative is early joint degeneration and onset of osteoarthritis.
References:
1. Wilk B et al: �The incidence of musculoskeletal injuries in an amateur triathlete racing club�. J Orthop Sports Phys
Ther 1995 Sep;22(3):108-12.
2. Collins K et al: �Overuse injuries in triathletes. A study of the 1986 Seafair Triathlon�. Am J Sports Med 1989 SepOct;17(5):675-80.
3. Korkia PK et al: �An epidemiological investigation of training and injury patterns in British triathletes�. Br J Sports Med 1994 Sep;28(3):191-6.
4. Ganz R. et al (2003): �Femoroacetabular impingement: a cause for osteoarthritis of the hip�. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 417:112�120. For more information see: www.hipfai.com
El Paso, TX. science based chiropractor, Dr. Alexander Jimenez looks at this uncommon problem � and how it can be treated.
The true incidence of obturator externus accidents is unknown, as frequently they may be misdiagnosed as hip joint pathology and/ or groin pathology as the website of symptoms as well as also the presenting objective signals may mimic other pathologies such as hip joint labrum pathology, anterior femoral triangle issues and perhaps even gluteal pathology.
Injury for this muscle gifts as a deep obscure groin/hip pain and functionally the muscle may still hide direct involvement as a pain generator since it is primarily a equilibrium muscle rather than a force-producing hip muscle.
This case study presents an unusual case of hip-related pain in a professional baseball player which also shown itself as an injury to the contralateral adductor longus.
The Player
As he was wrestled to the floor, his right hip was compelled at a rapid and loaded flexion/internal turning position. His first sensation was pain deep inside the anterior hip/groin area.
When he presented to the medical team with the accident, he complained of a profound catching sensation inside the hip joint location. It had been difficult to fully bend the hip and to also twist on the stationary limb (because he did whilst kicking a ball). His prior background consisted of a right-sided inguinal hernia repair five seasons before as well as a few gentle on again/off back osteitis pubis-type signs that would normally flare from the first period as his goal-kicking amounts have been increased. He was obviously a left- footed goal kicker.
On examination, he observed that the pain to become worse on passive flexion/internal rotation of the hip (hip walkway test). He was noticeably tight and irritated from the shallow TFL muscle, and also posteriorly across the greater trochanter around the insertion for the gluteals and deep hip rotators. He was also particularly high tone in the right iliopsoas muscle.
He was initially diagnosed clinically because of hip joint sprain due to the mechanism of harm being a pressured flexion/internal rotation type position that would always put pressure on the anterior hip joint capsule/labrum.
He was treated initially with deep iliopoas muscle sparks and hip joint mobilizations using a seat belt to gap the hip joint. He reacted reasonably well with the therapy and immediately felt more comfortable on a hip joint quadrant test. He was rested from coaching for 2 days and ran on the next day and played a match on the fourth day. But during the match, though his right hip did not create any pain, he’d notice pain on his left adductor source that was more pronounced during kicking.
Three days post-game he detected this ongoing left adductor origin pain and it was made worse by kicking again through training. An MRI was performed to Look at the left adductor origin and also the report noted:
Grade 1 left adductor longus strain deep in the
Grade 2 right obturator externus strain on its femoral attachment
Grade 1 right iliopsoas muscle strain in the MTJ.
The surprise finding on the MRI of a grade 2 obturator strain prompted the medical team to more formally assess the participant for ongoing hip joint disorder. The particular features to notice from this medical examination were:
Subjective
? A sensation of weakness and instability in the right hip whilst kicking with the left foot.
? No pain in the right hip with running, even with top-end speed. However, the left adductor longus was symptomatic on running and kicking.
Objective
? Pain on passive right hip internal rotation whilst in 90-degree hip flexion. This pain was deep anteriorly in the hip, almost presented as a groin problem.
? Some discomfort on resisted right hip flexion/external rotation deep inside the iliac fossa.
? Pain and weakness in the left adductor on adductor squeeze tests. These squeeze tests performed at 0/45/90 degrees of knee flexion with a pressure cuff between the knees. Usual pre-season scores measured 260/260/250. On current testing they measured 150/170/180. Pain was felt at the end of the squeeze.
? Discomfort with prone lie hip passive internal rotation. This pain was more focused around the right greater trochanter posteriorly.
Pathomechanics
It had been suspected that this player had endured a secondary injury to the left adductor longus (a muscle used a lot in goal-kicking) due to the inherent failure in bolstering the proper hip throughout the plant phase of the kick due to the inhibition of the right obturator externus, a muscle considered to be an important hip stabilizer and turning control muscle at the hip. With insufficient hip stabilization in kicking, the left hip was required to create more power to compensate for the unstable right hip to gain the length from the kick. Then the left adductor longus failed along with a strain injury led.
Management
The management of the matter initially centered on the two key features being the left-sided adductor strain and the right- sided obturator externus strain.
In the week following the accident, the player was sent to get a series of Actovegin shots to the left adductor longus. This was done according to protocol that was three injections every 48 hours — Monday/ Wednesday/Friday. In this five-day period the adductor longus was handled with deep tissue flush massage and gentle isometric adduction exercises at supine (chunk squeezes) in the three positions of examining — 0/45/90 levels of knee flexion — also as wall squat adductor squeezes in the same positions. The obturator externus was medicated with heavy tissue releases (obtained through the anterior groin region) and direct theraband strengthening of hip external rotation in sitting and in prone. Actovegin shots to the obturator externus are regarded as difficult because of problems with accessing this muscle through the superficial hip musculature.
The adductor exercises progressed into through array adduction with theraband resistance (equally with the left leg being the motion leg as well as the stability leg).
By 12 days post-injury it had been detected that the obturator externus strength had not improved and the player still had deep- seated right back pain pain. It was rationalised that perhaps the direct treatment to this muscle and also the direct open kinetic chain strengthening was possibly making the muscle texture worse. The choice was made to stop any direct hands-on therapy to the muscle and also to prevent any direct open kinetic chain strengthening. Instead the player lasted with bilateral theraband exercises of both hips into flexion and then abduction and expansion in addition to adduction. The avoidance of lead obturator externus soft tissue treatment and exercise appeared to improve the hip function immediately.
The participant started running 20 times post-injury and quickly progressed through running stages over a five-day period of conducting on alternate days. At this point the player’s adductor squeeze scores had improved to steps according to pre- season baselines. However, daily the player ran direct adductor strength operate using a Pilates reformer as a slider drill to immediately load into adduction in addition to hammering theraband adduction exercises in standing and in supine lying.
By 27 days post-injury the player managed to begin kicking, change in direction and rugby training. He played at 30 times post-injury with no ill effects.
Discussion
It arises immediately around the medial side of the obturator foramen, as well as the inferior ramus of the ischium; it also arises in the lateral two-thirds of this outer surface of the obturator membrane, and also in the tendinous arch which completes the canal to the passage of the obturator nerves and vessels.
The action of the muscle is to externally rotate the hip and also helps in hip adduction. It’s postulated to also work as a hip balance muscle in one legged stance along with the obturator internus, quadrutus femoris, piriformis and the gemelli muscles. In a practical activity such as kicking, the muscle acts to stabilize or hold the ball of the femur into the socket (acetabulum).
The incidence of harm to the obturator externus muscle is unknown because there are only a handful of case reports from the medical literature that highlight injuries for this muscle. Additionally, among the vexing issues is the difficulty in creating the correct clinical diagnosis based on the history and physical evaluation. MRI imaging is needed to correctly picture injuries to this muscle.
From the case study introduced, injury for the muscle was a direct result of forceful flexion/internal rotation mechanism to the hip joint. As the muscle primarily functions as a hip stabilizer during jogging, it is possible that a patient can mask symptoms during functioning as the muscle isn’t required to produce any hip skate for locomotion.
Nonetheless, in this event the muscle has a role in stability of the hip during kicking, and for that reason may have produced a poor pelvic/hip complicated during kicking that then led to an accident to the adductor longus on the other hand.
In addition, it seems that direct treatment to the muscle in the form of deep trigger point releases and also direct strengthening may actually delay healing in the muscle in case of injury. This may highlight the value of the muscle as a hip stabilizer instead of a legitimate torque manufacturer in hip rotation.
Most of us will experience it at some point — but how does it influence on athletic performance? Chiropractic injury specialist, Dr. Alexander Jimenez investigates.
Research postulates that 80 percent of the populace will undergo an acute onset of back pain at least once in their lifetimes. This adds a considerable financial burden not just on the medical system (physician consultations, prescribed drugs, physiotherapy) but also the financing of the workforce in lost employee hours and loss in productivity.
The types of lower back pain that an individual may experience include (but are not limited to):
1. Lumbar spine disc herniation with/ without sciatica
8. Inflammatory arthritis such as rheumatoid and anklyosing spondylitis
9. Facet joint sprains
10. Bone injuries such as stress fractures, pars defects and spondylolisthesis.
The focus for this paper will be on the previous group — that the bone injuries. This may be simply postural (slow onset repetitive trauma) or related to sports; for instance, gymnastics.
The two demographic groups that tend to endure the most extension-related low back pain are:
1. People who endure all day, for instance, retailers, army, security guards etc.. Prolonged position will obviously force the pelvis to start to migrate to an anterior tilt management. This may begin to place compressive pressure on the facet joints of the spinal column as they also change towards an expansion position since they accompany the pelvic tilt.
2. Extension sports such as gymnastics, tennis, swimming, diving, football codes, volleyball, basketball, track and field, cricket fast bowlers. This is more pronounced in sports that involve extension/rotation.
Pathomechanics
With normal extension of the lumbar spine (or backward bending), the facet joints begin to approximate each other and compress.�The articular processes of this facet above will abut the articular process of the facet below. This is a normal biomechanical movement. However, if the extension ranges are excessive, the procedures will impinge quite aggressively and damage to the cartilage surfaces within the facet joint can result. Sports such as gymnastics, functioning in tennis, and handling in American Soccer may all involve uncontrolled and excessive extension.
It would be unlikely that a bone stress response or even a stress fracture could be brought on by an isolated expansion injury. It would be more likely that a sudden forced extension injury may damage an already pre-existing bone strain reaction.
Similarly, if an individual stands daily and the pelvis migrates into lateral tilt, then the aspects will be placed under low load compression but for extensive intervals.
With ongoing uncontrolled loading, stress is then transferred from the facet joint to the bone below (pars interarticularis). This originally will manifest as a pressure reaction on the bone. This bone strain may advance to a stress fracture throughout the pars if uncorrected. This fracture is also referred to as a “pars flaw”, or spondylolysis.
It was initially considered that stress fractures of the pars was a congenital defect that introduced itself at the teenage years. However, it is now agreed that it is probably obtained through years of overuse into extension positions, especially in young sportspeople involved with expansion sports. What’s more, one-sided pars defects often occur more commonly in sport which also included a rotational component such as tennis serving or fast bowling in cricket.
The stress fracture can then advance to impact the opposite side, causing a bilateral strain fracture, with anxiety subsequently being transferred to the disk in between both levels.
Spondylolisthesis features bilateral pars defects which could possibly be a result of repetitive stress into the bilateral pars in extension athletics, but more likely it is an independent pathology that manifests in the early growing stages (9-14) as this pathology is often viewed in this age category. If they become symptomatic in later years because of involvement in expansion sports, it is exceedingly likely that the defects were there by a young age but presented asymptomatically. As a result of rapid growth spurts in teenage years and the high-volume training experienced by teenaged athletes, it is possible that these dormant spondylolisthesis then pose as ‘acute onset’ back pain in teenage years.
In summary, the progression of this bone stress reactions tends to follow the following continuum:
1. Facet joint irritation
2. Pars interarticularis stress response
3. Stress fracture to the pars
4. Pars defect (or spondylolysis)
5. Spondylolisthesis due to activity or more likely congenital and found later in teenage years due to participation in�extension sports.
The landmark publication related to spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis was presented by Wiltse et al (1976) and they classified these injuries as follows:
1. Type I: dysplastic � congenital abnormalities of L5 or the upper sacrum allow anterior displacement of L5 on the sacrum.
2. Type II: isthmic � a lesion in the pars interarticularis occurs. This is subclassified as
a. lytic, representing a fatigue fracture of the pars,
b. elongated but intact pars, and c. acute fracture.
3. Type III: degenerative � secondary to long-standing intersegmental instability with associated remodeling of the articular processes.
4. Type IV: traumatic � acute fractures in vertebral arch other than the pars.
5. Type V: pathological � due to generalized or focal bone disease affecting the vertebral arch.
The vast majority of spondylolysis and sponylolisthesis accidents are Type II — the isthmic variety.
For the purposes of this paper, we will refer to the above stages as the posterior arch bone stress injuries (PABSI).
Epidemiology
It is a lot more widespread at the L5 level (85-90 percent). It’s a high asymptomatic prevalence in the general population and is often found unintentionally on x ray imaging. Nonetheless, in athletes, particularly young athletes, it is a common reason for persistent low back pain. From the young athlete, the problem is often referred to as ‘active spondylolysis’.
Active spondylolysis is normal in virtually every gamenevertheless, sports such as gymnastics and diving and cricket pose a much greater danger due to the extension and turning character of the sport. The progression from an active spondylolysis into a non-union type spondylolisthesis has been associated with a greater prevalence of spinal disk degeneration.
Early detection through screening and imaging, therefore, will highlight those early at the bone stress phase and if caught early enough and managed, the progression to the larger and more complicated pathologies are avoided as a result of therapeutic capacity of the pars interarticularis in the early stages.
It is more common to find teens and young adults afflicted by PABSI. This will highlight the rapid growth of the spine through growth spurts that is also characterized by a delay in the motor control of the muscle system during this period. Furthermore, it’s thought that the neural arch actually gets stronger in the fourth decade hence possibly explaining the low incidence of bone stress reactions in mid ages.
The incidence of spondylolysis has been reported to be around 4-6% in the Caucasian population (Friedrikson et al 1984). The rates seem to be lower in females and also in African-American males. It has also been suggested that a link exists between pars defects and spina bifida occulta.
The incidence of spondylolysis seems to be higher in the young athletic population than in the general population. Studies in gymnasts, tennis, weightlifting, divers and wrestlers all show disproportionately high incidence of spondylolysis compared with the general population of age-matched subjects.
Tennis
The tennis serve generates excessive extension and rotation force. In addition, the forehand shot may also produce elevated levels of spinning/ extension. The more traditional forehand shot demanded a great deal of weight shift through the legs to the torso and arms. However, a more favorite forehand shot is to currently face the ball and also generate the force of this shot utilizing hip rotation and lumbar spine extension. This action does increase ball speed but also puts more extension and compressive loads on the spine potentially resulting in a greater degree of stress on the bone components.
Golf
The most likely skill component involved in golf that may cause a PABSI are the tee shot with a 1 wood when forcing for distance. The follow-through of this shot entails a significant quantity of spine rotation with maybe a level of spine expansion.
Cricket
Fast bowlers in cricket are the most susceptible to PABSI. This will occur on the opposite side to the bowling arm. As the front foot engages on plant stage, the pelvis abruptly stops moving but the spine and chest continue to proceed. With the wind-up of this bowling action (rotation), when coupled with expansion this can place large forces on the anterior arch of the thoracic. More than 50% of fast bowlers will create a pars stress fracture. Young players (up to 25) are most vulnerable. Cricket governments have implemented training and competition guidelines to avoid such injuries by restricting the number of meals in training/games.
Field Events
The more common field events to cause a PABSI would be high leap followed by javelin. Both these sports create enormous ranges of backbone extension and under significant load.
Contact Sports
Sports like NFL, rugby and AFL all require skill components that need backbone expansion under load.
Gymnastics/Dancers
It goes without saying that gymnastics and dancing involves a substantial amount of repetitive spine expansion, particularly backflips and arabesques. It has been suggested that nearly all Olympic degree gymnasts could have suffered from a pars defect. Many organizing bodies now put limits on the number of hours young gymnasts can instruct to prevent the repetitive loading on the spine.
Diving
Spine extension injuries occur mostly off the spring board and on water entrance.
Diagnosis Of PABSI In Athletes
Clinical investigation
These can pose as preventable injuries. Research shows that the incidence was emphasized from the general population that have nil indicators of back pain. But, individuals will typically complain of back ache that is deep and generally unilateral (one side). This may radiate into the buttock area. The most offending movements tend to be described as expansion moves or backward bending movements. This may be a slow progression of pain or might be initiated by one acute episode of back pain in a competitive extension motion.
On clinical examination:
1. Pain may be elicited with a one-leg extension/rotation test (standing on the leg on the affected side) � stork test.
2. Tenderness over the site of the fracture.
3. Postural faults such as excessive anterior tilt and/or pelvic asymmetry.
The one-legged hyperextension test (stork test) was suggested to be pathognomonic for busy spondylolysis. A negative evaluation was stated to effectively exclude the diagnosis of a bone stress-type injury, thus creating radiological investigations unnecessary.
But, Masci et al (2006) examined the connection between the one-legged hyperextension test and gold standard bone scintigraphy and MRI. They discovered that the one-legged hyperextension test was neither sensitive nor specific for active spondylolysis. Moreover, its negative predictive value was so poor. Thus, a negative test can’t exclude energetic spondylolysis as a possible cause.
Masci et al (2006) go on to indicate that the bad relationship between imaging and the one-legged test may be because of a number of factors. The extension test would be expected to move a significant extension force on to the lower back spine. In addition to putting substantial strain on the pars interarticularis, it might also stress different regions of the spinal column like facet joints as well as posterior lumbar disks, and this may subsequently induce pain in the existence of other pathology such as facet joint arthropathy and spinal disc disease. This will explain the poor specificity of the test. Conversely, the inadequate sensitivity of the test may be related to the subjective reporting of pain by issues performing the maneuvre, which may vary based on individual pain tolerance. Additionally, this evaluation can preferentially load the fifth cervical vertebra, and so bone stress located in the upper lumbar spine may not test positive.
Grade 1 spondylolisthesis are normally asymptomatic; nonetheless, grade 2+ lesions often present with leg pain, either with or without leg pain. On examination, a palpable slip could be evident.
Imaging
Clinical assessment of active spondylolysis and the more severe pars defects and spondylolisthesis can be notoriously non-specific; this is, not all patients suffering PABSI will present with favorable abstract features or positive signs on analyzing. Thus, radiological visualization is important for diagnosis. The imaging methods available in the diagnosis of bone stress injury are:
1. Conventional radiology. This test is not very sensitive but is highly unique. Its limits are partially because of the cognitive orientation of the pars defect. The oblique 45-degree films may show the timeless ‘Scotty Dog’ appearance. Spondylolisthesis can be looked at simply on a lateral movie x-ray.
2. Planar bone scintigraphy (PBS) and single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT). SPECT enhances sensitivity in addition to specificity of PBS than straightforward radiographic study. Comparative research between PBS and conventional radiology have shown that scintigraphy is more sensitive. Patients with positive SPECT scan must then undergo a reverse gantry CT scan to assess whether the lesion is active or old.
3. Computed tomography (CT). The CT scan is considered to be more sensitive than conventional radiology and with higher specificity than SPECT. Regardless of the type of cross-sectional image utilized, the CT scan provides information on the state of the flaw (intense fracture, unconsolidated flaw with geodes and sclerosis, pars in procedure for consolidation or repair). The “inverse gantry” perspective can evaluate this condition better. Repeat CT scan can be used to track progress and recovery of the pars defect.
4. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). This technique shows pronounced changes in the signal in the amount of the pars. This is recognized as “stress response” and can be classified into five different degrees of action. MRI can be helpful for evaluating elements that stabilize isthmic lesions, for example intervertebral disc, common anterior ligament, and related lesions. The MRI isn’t as specific or sensitive as SPECT and CT combination.
Therefore, the current gold standards of investigation for athletes with low back pain are:
1. bone scintigraphy with single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT); if positive then
MRI has many advantages over bone scintigraphy, for instance, noninvasive nature of the imaging along with the absence of ionizing radiation. MRI changes in active spondylolysis include bone marrow edema, visualized as increased signal in the pars interarticularis on edema-sensitive sequences, and fracture, visualized as reduced signal in the pars interarticularis on T1 and T2 weighted sequences.
However, there is greater difficulty in detecting the changes of busy spondylolysis from MRI. Detecting pathology from MRI relies on the interpretation of distinct contrasts of signals compared with normal tissue. Unlike stress fractures in different parts of the body, the little region of the pars interarticularis may make detection of those changes harder.
However, unlike MRI, computed tomography has the capability to differentiate between acute and chronic fractures, and this differentiation might be an important determinant of fracture healing. Accordingly, in areas using pars interarticularis fractures discovered by MRI, it might nonetheless be necessary to execute thin computed tomography slices to determine whether or not a fracture is severe or chronic — an important factor in fracture resolution.
The previous rehab masterclass on Lisfrancs injuries highlighted the pathogenesis of injuries, the midfoot joint’s relevant factors, and typical injury mechanisms were presented along with diagnostic findings. In this masterclass scientific specialist Dr. Alexander Jimenez discusses the management of Lisfranc injuries…
Management
After the initial injury, it may not be clear exactly what harm the foot has been done to by the athlete. Both athlete and sports medicine staff may confuse. The athlete with subtle stage 1-type injuries will try to ‘run off’ the pain. As they continue and fail to reevaluate they will stop training/competition.
When an injury into the Lisfranc is suspected, the first MTP joint ought to be assessed to exclude a ‘toe’ injury and the ankle checked to exclude an ankle injury. They crutches till they could be properly analyzed and remain non-weightbearing ideally with an Aircast boot and need to ice the foot aggressively.
Non-operative�Treatment of Lisfranc Injuries
A stage 1 accident that’s functionally secure could be handled with a non-weight posture boot or cast for a first two weeks. They can be analyzed for tenderness on palpation over the TMT joint at this time and follow-up x-rays will be required to exclude any latent diastasis of the second and first metatarsal space. If pain-free on palpation and x ray is normal, they could have the weight bearing status assessed using complete weight bearing foot flat and position is raised by a toe. If that is normal they can stay out of the boot using a custom made orthotic and rehabilitation and return to conditioning may begin.
Then the boot is reapplied, if the foot stays painful to palpate or if they neglect raise test and they stay non weight bearing to partial weight bearing for a further four weeks.
For pain along with weightbearing status they’re reassessed in the stage. If these are uneventful then the rehabilitation and reconditioning stream is moved to by the athlete. If problematic they need to be assessed for postponed stabilisation.
The time period to get a injury that is secure could be a month recovery until return to play.
Operative Treatment Lisfranc Injuries
Stage 2 and stage 3 accidents need to have the midfoot surgically stabilized since they’re generally unstable injuries. Interestingly, Hummell et al (2010) recently clarified a successful result in a point 3 football player with non-operative treatment. The objective of surgery is to acquire a fantastic reduction to optimize functional results. Virtually all expert opinions relating to Lisfranc injuries emphasize the importance of gaining as to avoid long- term morbidity from the midfoot.
Myerson et al (1986) identified some things that result in poor outcome for example residual angulation between the metatarsals, diastasis greater than 2mm between the first and second metatarsals. Correcting these defects is essential to avoid long-term complications like chronic functional disability , post-injury arthritis and instability with walking.
To obtain reduction of the TMT joints reduction is usually necessary to remove any tissue for example little bone fragments or ligaments. Reduction is supported with fluoroscopy. Nevertheless, in instances percutaneous fixation can be accomplished if the dislocation can be reduced by the surgeon under fluoroscopy and stabilize the joints together with wires and screws. However, most will require an open reduction to properly visualize and access of the joints that are tarsometarsal.
The choice of hardware for surgery is debatable surgeons the choices are:
1. Cannulated screws;
2. Solid, Non-cannulated screws;
3. K wires;
4. Bridge plates for tarsometatarsal joints.
At a thorough literature review, Stavlas et al (2010) found that injuries to the first few metatarsals (lateral and middle column) react well with screw fixation, whereas harms to the fourth and fifth metatarsals (lateral column) may respond well with K wire fixation.
Post-Operative Rehabilitation
This will often involve a non-weight- bearing cast or boot to get the first 3 weeks with a CAM/Aircast boot used for the subsequent three to five weeks so that the athlete is complete weight. Weight is slowly built around the eight to twelve months post-operative interval so that in a custom-made orthotic the athlete can weight bear by 3 months that.
The hardware is often removed at 12-16 weeks post-op in lighter athletes and in heavier athletes (>200 lbs) it’s been suggested to take out the hardware in 24 weeks (Nunley and Verullo 2002).
Post-surgery the results are generally favourable. Nunley and Vertullo (2002) discovered that in stable stage 1 harms, great outcome was found with conservative treatment with athletes back to game at 11-18 weeks post-injury. Athletes with stage 2 injuries had good outcomes with ORIF and returned to play 12-20 weeks. Period 3 accidents were not described.
Physiotherapy
The athlete will see that the physiotherapist athletic coach weekly to regain mobility. Interventions will be necessary in addition to direct mobilizations to restore the accessory movements.
The therapist can also start intrinsic foot muscle exercises at approximately 8-10 weeks post-operative using the weight bearing exercises being postponed until week 12 post-operative. These exercises are designed to retrain the arch to be controlled by the foot muscles. Exercises that will satisfy this are towel scrunchies, cup drop, matt equilibrium and lunge exercises (see below).
The movement can be measured by the therapist regularly with knee.
1. Towel scrunchies. These have been used by therapists to strengthen the muscles that support the foot’s arch.
A. Place a towel onto a tiled or wooden floor (carpet will not work.
B. set the foot relaxed on the towel with all the foot in line with the knee and hip. The feet should be pointing directly ahead.
C. Initiate the movement by attempting to firstly raise the arch. Think about drawing the ball of the foot to the heel. You will see that the arch is going to lift.
D. Next use all the feet to loosen the towel under the foot.
E. Relax the foot and start again.
F. This exercise doesn’t cause any soreness the next day; the muscles should start to fatigue.
G. The development is seated, to standing on one leg and standing on two legs.
2. The cup drop. This can be an interesting and innovative way to integrate inherent arch muscle function and anti- pronator muscle function that is extrinsic using hip muscles that are hip, in particular the gluteus maximus and medius. During weight bearing, the hip is prevented by the gluteus medius muscle from rotating and adducting, and this action works well with the arch muscles preventing excess pronation.
A. Place a few small objects like marbles about one foot in front of your body.
B. Reach forward with the foot and also pick up the masonry with the feet. Of clawing at the masonry this activity will trigger the muscles.
C. Whilst holding the marble in the feet, circle the hip outwards into both sides of the body then behind the body and set the marble at a cup placed at 45 degrees to the cool.
D. It is necessary that the foot stays turned outwards as this retains the gluteus active.
3. The mat balance. This exercise incorporates these together with the arch muscles and adds contraction of the calf muscles both the gastrocnemius and soleus. The drill is done on a gentle matt, to create the exercise challenging. The mat surface generates an unstable situation, and there is mounting evidence that indicates that by incorporating a component of balance control to a rehab exercise may be necessary since the perturbations in movement excite all of the position feedback nerve endings which control proprioception. The nerve endings feedback to the muscle control system and also this potentiates the stimulation of their control muscles.
A.Place a soft mat in addition to a 6mm piece of timber or hard rubber mat. The thicker the mat that the harder the exercise.
B. Stand on the mat but just with the third, fourth and fifth feet connected with the matt. The first and second feet should be hanging unsupported from the mat.
C. This position of the foot makes a scenario whereby the foot wishes to turn in under gravity’s effect. The long pronation muscles in the shin and the muscles need to control the interior of the foot to keep it up and of the floor.
D. Attempting to keep equilibrium (and this will be hard when the matt is too soft), marginally boost the heel to participate the calf muscles.
E. Hold this position for 1-2 seconds and then slowly lower down to the beginning position.
F. Perform 3 sets of 10 repetitions.
4. Lunge with towel scrunchie. This workout is a high-level integration workout which combines gluteals and arch muscles whilst performing a exercise such as the lunge. This sort of exercise is done in late phase rehab prior to running as the muscle activation patterns more resemble what should happen in conducting concerning limb assistance — that is, the arch muscles control pronation, the quads control the knee and patella and the gluteus medius affirms the hip throughout foot strike.
A. Stand on a towel, very similar to Exercise 1 above.
B. Put some theratubing around a post and also wrapped round the upper tibia. The ring has to be guided to pull the tibia inwards, not outwards. This pulling in of the tibia can cause the top leg to follow along with this is imitating hip adduction and internal rotation. The goal of the exercise is to prevent it by maintaining the kneecap aligned with the next toes. The gluteals finally have to work to permit this to occur. Inwards and way would fall from the third toe, if they did not.
C. Gradually lower down into a lunge whilst keeping the monitoring of the kneecap over the next toe and also keeping the towel scrunched up under the foot.
D. Lift up to full knee extension. Rest. Start again.
Strength
The athlete will initially load throughout the foot with the foot impartial. Exercises such as split squat, high- foot leg press and posterior string movements such as deadlifts and stand pulls may start in the weight bearing phase. Exercises requiring more ankle dorsiflexion and so midfoot pronation will be delayed for a couple of weeks until strength and confidence improve (traditional one-leg squats, deadlifts and leg press).
Rehabilitation
The graded progressions for your athlete have been well summarized by Lorenz and Beauchamp (2013). The progression is a staged progression to gradually regain strength and confidence from landing and push-off positions. If the stage is pain free, the progressions could be made, the athlete could do selection and without compensations to the movement.
1. Bilateral heel raises
2. Heel raise,�single-leg eccentric lower
3. Single leg-heel raise from standing
4. Bilateral leaning heel raises
5.�Bilateral leaning heel raises, single leg�eccentric lower
6. Single-leg leaning heel raises
7. Single-leg triple extension heel raises
8. Mini-tramp low Impact exercises
A. Bilateral jumps in position
B. turns in place (two legs).
C. turns in place (two legs).
D. Jog in place
E. Three hops uninvolved, one hop involved
F. Two hops uninvolved, two hops involved
G. One hop uninvolved three hops involved
9. Agility ladder
A. Different frontal transverse plane designs
B. Hopscotch to involved negative (two to one)
10. Single-leg A/P jumps in place
11. Single leg M/L jumps in place
12. Single leg transverse jumps in position
13. Single leg hops in agility ladder
Return To Running
The choice as to when to remove the hardware will influences the choice. As a general rule, when the screws and wires are eliminated, the athlete will be permitted to attend and walk gym sessions to the elimination but running will probably be delayed.
The athlete is encouraged to walk a treadmill using a incline to promote the push. This can start at 12 weeks . The athlete may quickly advance into backward and forward running on grass and it’s expected they are doing so by week 14 depending on when the hardware was taken away. As they progress through running they could slowly begin to construct speed they reach sprint speed.
Gentle off-line running drills such as weaving, easy bypassing, stepping and caricoca drills would normally be started in around 16 weeks post-op and progressed into tougher single-leg and hard-cutting plyometrics as pain allowed. It would be expected that by 20 weeks post-op, the foot has sufficient strength, range of movement and confidence to start team- based ability function. Prior to this, the athlete can experience some frequent field hop tests like tests and single-leg triple jump to assess differences in abilities.
Functional Tests
A evaluation that is practical sports-specific is a test or field test that aims to mimic the movements. The use of practical tests aims to recognize imbalances and will boost confidence in both patient and the clinician the injured patient can return to play. It is effectively a way of reducing the hazard. The evaluation ought to be an objective, measurable and quantifiable test that includes a component of:
Strength
Agility
Power
Balance Neuromuscular status.
The aspects can be incorporated into practical tests such as agility and jumps/ movement evaluations.
The hop tests comprise:
1. Single jump
2. Triple hops
3. Crossover jump
4. 6m timed jump.
Single limb evaluations are necessary as study proves that dual limb and modified double limb tests don’t demonstrate any differences between groups since the uninvolved limb can mask deficits of the thoracic (Myer et al 2011). Single-leg hopping evaluations are sensitive enough to discover asymmetry, and specifically the crossover hop test at six months post-op is the most sensitive of these tests at predicting future function of the knee along with the 6m timed test is the most vulnerable and sensitive of under normal function at six months . (Logerstedt et al 2012).
Therefore isolated single-limb performance tests may provide a critical element to field-based operational performance testing to identify deficits in reduced limb performance, including deficits in force attenuation functional power and postural stability. The capability to maintain isolated single limb electricity is significant in sports that require significant control in stepping edge and cutting manoeuvres. This may require and ability to regenerate and divert and then to absorb force on one limb the motion.
Conclusion
Injuries are uncommon in athletes on account of the severe consequences they could have on athletic role, the sports medicine specialist has to be well versed in evaluation and initial management. They can be challenging injuries manage and to diagnose for the clinician.
Stable Lisfranc injuries with no instability can be handled conservatively stage 2 and 3 accidents involving diastasis of their second and first metatarsals requires consideration. This can be done usually using the open reduction and fixation with screws, K cables and/or plates
Rehabilitation after surgery will take no less than 12-16 weeks it’s typical for the return to sport to take in contact sport athletes. Successful return to competition time frames extend to the 20-24 week stage post-surgery and rehab will involve reduction of the entire limb kinetic chain but also not only the foot muscles.
References
1. Castro et al (2010) Lisfranc joint ligamentous complex: MRI with anatomic correlation in cadavers. AJR. 195; W447-455.
2. Chiodo CP and Myerson MS (2001) Developments and advances in the diagnosis and treatment of injuries to the
tarsometatarsal joint. Orthop Clin North America. 32(11); 11-20.
3. Garrick JG and Requa RK (1988) The epidemiology of foot and ankle injuries in sports. Clinical Sports Medicine. 7: 29-36.
4. Hummell et al (2010) Management of a stage 3 Lisfranc ligament injury in a collegiate football player. Athletic Training and Sports Health Care. 10(10); 1-5.
5. Logerstedt et al (2012) Single-legged hop tests as predictors of self reported knee function after ACL reconstruction. The Delaware-Oslo ACL cohort study. American Journal of Sports Med. 40(10); 2348-2356.
6. Lorenz and Beauchamp (2013) Case report. The functional progression and return to sport criteria for a high school football player following surgery for a Lisfranc injury. The International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy. 8(2); 162-171.
7. Myer GD, Schmitt LC, Brent JL, Ford KR, Barber KD, Scherer BJ, Heidt RS, Divine JG and Hewett TE (2011) Utilization of modified NFL combine testing to identify functional deficits in athletes following ACL reconstruction.
Journal of Sports Physical Therapy. 41(6); 377- 387.
8. Myers et al (1994) Midfoot sprains in collegiate football. American Journal of Sports Medicine. 21; 392-401.
9. Myerson et al (1986) Fracture dislocations of the tarsometatarsal joints: end results correlated with pathology and treatment. Foot and Ankle. 6(5); 225-242.
10. Nunley JA and Vertullo CJ (2002) Classification, investigation and management of midfoot sprains: Lisfranc injuries in the athlete. American Journal of Sports Medicine. 30(6); 871-878.
11. Ouzounian TJ and Sheriff MJ (1989) In vitro determination of midfoot motion. Foot and Ankle. 10; 140-146.
12. Rankine et al (2012) The diagnostic accuracy of radiographs in Lisfranc injury and the potential value of a craniocaudal projection. AJR. 198; W365-369.
13. Shapiro et al (1994) Rupture of the LisFranc�s ligament in athletes. American Journal of Sports Medicine. 22(5); 687-691.
14. Stavlas et al (2010) The role of reduction and internal fixation of Lisfranc fracturedislocation: a systematic review. International Orthopaedics. 34; 1083-1091.
Chiropractor, Dr. Alexander Jimenez summarizes some fascinating injury stories in the combat game…
I was recently on a holiday in Koh Lanta in Thailand and throughout my holiday I visited a Muay Thai training gym for two reasons. Firstly, as I’ve had a fascination with the sport for some time having formerly handled some injuries in some fighters in Australia it was to have a private Muay Thai training session with a few of the boxers. I was that I could use as material. I clarified the purpose of my visit and approached the head coach and discover a few of the interesting injury stories they’d out and he was pleased for me to talk to a few fighters. The following are just two case studies from this fact-finding mission.
The Biker’s Elbow
The initial fighter was a seeing K1 fighter out of Holland who spends six weeks a year in Thailand. He had been a fit and healthy 25-year-old man with a history of prior knee and back injuries; nonetheless, his complaint at this stage was pain on the inside of the right elbow that made grappling through fighting and also lifting weights at the gym hard.
The pain had started only a few days to his recent trip to Thailand and had been present for about five days. It had been focused around the medial epicondyle of the elbow. Any powerful gripping moves whilst flexing the elbow was shown to be debilitating. It had been affecting his coaching as some other work that was grappling was too painful and he was unable to perform any type gym movements such as chin ups and rowing motions. All pushing type movements were asymptomatic.
He whined no preceding elbow pain and refused any trauma to the elbow such as a arm lock-type situation or a hyperextension type injury during training or fighting.
He had been tender to palpate the source of the wrist flexor muscles which start on the elbow along, as well as any forceful wrist extension was uneasy. His elbow felt secure and using a stress test. Strong grip of the hands was painless until he was put to a position of wrist extension that is complete.
With no history of injury and without any changes to his coaching regimen I quizzed him. We exercised that whilst in Thailand he traveled on a scooter — a pastime for thieves to tackle when. He’d spent plenty of time around the sightseeing on the bicycle when he came.
The type of scooter he used was a automatic without equipment shifting the accelerator is on the right side of the bars. The reasoning was because of the continuous wrist extension used to accelerate the scooter at a pronated position, the wrist flexor muscles were put in a position of stretch with constant tension due to the co-contraction of this wrist flexor/extensor group required to do this particular movement. Coupled with this was that the vibration that is constant on the bicycle caused by the movement of the scooter in addition to the frequent pot holes and undulating road typical of Thai roads. The diagnosis was an inflammatory response in the wrist flexor origin.
I made the following suggestions:
1. Regularly extend by putting the hand flat on a table with the wrist turned to supination, the wrist flexors. He was to hold this for 30-second efforts.
2. Soft tissue massage to the wrist flexor muscle group, something he could do in Thailand using the massages on offer.
3. Moderate outrageous wrist flexor exercise working with a 5kg dumbbell using the forearm put on a desk (palm upward) and also to slowly lower the weight into wrist extension and use the flip side to help the concentric lifting. He was to do this
4. Change the hand place on the accelerator. It was suggested he can do three distinct things to achieve this. Primarily he can flare the elbow out broad whilst riding to decrease the amount. He up to this point kept the elbow close in to the body to perform this. Secondly he could occasionally hold the accelerator handle on the end so that he could keep his forearm supination position as this requires radial deviation to quicken the bike. Finally, on stretches of street I invited him undo the grip so he utilized wrist flexion to accelerate the bicycle and to actually supinate his forearm.
5. Rub some topical gel.
Two weeks later, I saw him and he maintained that the elbow pain had entirely subsided.
The Buzzing Thigh
A 30-year-old Thai local fighter had whined a six- month history of a ‘buzzing’ kind pain on the outside of the thigh and in the calf that was ideal region. It’d started after he obtained a hard kick to the back of his right hip. The kick was so strong that he lost function of his right leg at the time and needed a sensation down the thigh into the foot and calf. As this occurred in training, he rested on the leg and stopped and used the Thai concoction of heat and ointments to manage this harm. He returned to coaching a couple of days later and had been involved in a couple of fights after. He felt he had been still practical, but still felt a buzzing sensation every time. He claimed that he managed to perform everything and even blows to the thigh and hip were no longer painful than normal.
On examination he had movement in both hips his internal rotation when lying prone was decreased compared to another side. He was able to squat and perform a single leg pain free. All knee motions and ligament testing demonstrated unremarkable.
What was painful was a slump test on the ideal side and this reproduced the proper- sided throat sensations he experienced with kicking. The pain was made worse with dorsiflexion of the ankle whilst at a slump position.
It was concluded that when he had sustained the blow to the posterior hip, he had bruised the subsequent hematoma and the right piriformis muscle had created fibrosis around the sciatic nerve. Each time he had to stretch into full hip flexion with the knee extended and the foot dorsiflexed to complete a roundhouse kick, he had been effectively stretching the nerve against the port made by the scarring and fibrosis around the guts by the preceding injury to the soft tissues. This would be sufficient to give him a neuropathic-type pain down the leg across the course of the nerve and in the superficial peroneal nerve.
I explained that the way to remove this was to frequently ‘extend’ or move the guts from the vents to try to release the nerve out of any fibrosis. I showed him how to run his own gentle nerve mobilizations as a slide and slide method (neurological wracking) and also how to hold the place on stretch to make a sustained elongation.
He did so sitting on the conclusion of the fighting ring at a full slump position (neck flexed, spine arched into flexion) and he had been to straighten the ideal knee with the foot dorsiflexed until he felt a gentle uncomfortable tug onto the guts (felt like a buzzing down the ideal leg). This was to be achieved to this point of discomfort but not pain. I explained that if he overdid motion and this stretch he could make the issue worse, so I invited him to underdo this and not over do this. He had been to spend five minutes after a warm-up finishing a string of knee extension and release the stretch. After a pause continue this on/off movement for five minutes per day and he was to stretch again.
I didn’t figure out how this solved as this movement would take a few weeks to make a noticeable shiftI can expect that he would have discovered a relief from his signs at some stage in the future.
IFM's Find A Practitioner tool is the largest referral network in Functional Medicine, created to help patients locate Functional Medicine practitioners anywhere in the world. IFM Certified Practitioners are listed first in the search results, given their extensive education in Functional Medicine
