Based on the data for NUSA in asymptomatic volunteers, a new classification is proposed for spinal deformity.
METHODS: A review of the English literature was conducted to identify studies evaluating NUSA from the occiput to the pelvis in asymptomatic
juvenile, adolescent, adult, and geriatric volunteers. From the literature review, 17 angles and displacements were selected to depict neutral upright coronal and axial spinal alignment, and 21 angles and displacements were selected to depict neutral upright sagittal spinal alignment. Pooled estimates of the mean and variance were calculated for the angles and displacements from the articles that met inclusion criteria. A new classification of spinal deformity was then developed based on age-dependent NUSA; spinal abnormality; deformity curve location, pattern, magnitude, and flexibility; and global spinal Lonafarnib ic50 alignment.
RESULTS: Despite a wide variation in the regional curves from LDK378 the occiput to the pelvis in asymptomatic volunteers, global spinal alignment is maintained
in a narrow range for preservation of horizontal gaze and balance of the spine over the pelvis and femoral heads.
CONCLUSION: A new classification of spinal deformity is proposed that provides a structure for defining deformity of all patient ages and spinal abnormalities.”
“Background. The prevalence and degree of self-reported distress that patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) experience after cognitive testing remain unknown. It is also unknown whether this level of distress is at all related to specific patient factors, test performance, or awareness of test performance.
Methods. In 154 mild-to-moderate AD patients and 62 cognitively intact patients, we measured self-reported distress, on a five-point Likert scale, after 45 minutes of cognitive testing. Using multivariate PD0325901 cost logistic regression, we then examined whether demographic factors, level of education, depressive symptoms, cognitive performance, perceived test difficulty,
and perceived test performance compared to 10 years ago were predictive of self-reported distress.
Results. The prevalence of any self-reponed distress in patients with AD was 70% compared to 47% in patients without AD) < .001). Of persons with AD, bivariate analyses revealed that those who reported more difficulty with testing (relative risk [RR] 1.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25-1.37) and felt that they performed worse than 10 years ago (RR 1.2 1; 95% CI, 1.07-1.30) were at increased risk for reporting more distress. Paradoxically, cognitive performance was a weak predictor of distress, with only language performance demonstrating an association (RR 0.95; 95% CI, 0.89-0.99). Adjustments for demographic factors, education, dementia severity, or depressive symptoms in the multivariable analyses did not alter these relationships.