The use of cryotherapy, i.e. the application of cold for the treatment of injury or disease, is widespread in sports medicine today. It is an established method when treating acute soft tissue injuries, but there is a discrepancy between the scientific basis for cryotherapy and clinical studies. Various methods such as ice packs, ice towels, ice massage, gel packs, refrigerant gases and inflatable splints can be used. Cold is also used to reduce the recovery time as part of the rehabilitation programme both after acute injuries and in the treatment of chronic injuries. Cryotherapy has also been shown to reduce pain effectively in the post-operative period after reconstructive surgery of the joints. Both superficial and deep temperature changes depend on the method of application, initial temperature and application time. The physiological and biological effects are due to the reduction in temperature in the various tissues, together with the neuromuscular action and relaxation of the muscles produced by the application of cold. Cold increases the pain threshold, the viscosity and the plastic deformation of the tissues but decreases the motor performance. The application of cold has also been found to decrease the inflammatory reaction in an experimental situation. Cold appears to be effective and harmless and few complications or side-effects after the use of cold therapy are reported. Prolonged application at very low temperatures should, however, be avoided as this may cause serious side-effects, such as frost-bite and nerve injuries. Practical applications, indications and contraindications Effects of cryotherapyCryotherapy is assumed to retard haematoma formation due to capillary constriction and decreased blood flow. It is also assumed that cold reduces the inflammatory response after a soft tissue injury, by

No abstract

Based on our definition, the prevalence of new persistent opioid use among opioid-naïve women undergoing hysterectomy is low; however, 2 potentially modifiable risk factors are preoperative opioid prescription and abdominal route of surgery.

Between 2010 and 2013, laparoscopy emerged as the most common surgical approach for hysterectomy, and outpatient hysterectomy became more common than inpatient among women with commercially based insurance. While average reimbursement per case increased, overall payments for hysterectomy are decreasing because of decreased utilization and dramatic differences in how hysterectomy is performed.

Background-Laparotomy followed by inpatient hospitalization has traditionally been the most common surgical care for hysterectomy. The financial implications of the increased use of laparoscopy and outpatient hysterectomy are unknown.Objectives-To quantify the increasing use of laparoscopy and outpatient hysterectomy and to describe the financial implications among women with commercially based insurance in the United States.Study Design-Hysterectomies between 2010 and 2013 were identified in the Health claims for more than 25 million women. Surgical approach was categorized with Care Cost Institute, a national dataset with inpatient and outpatient private insurance procedure codes as abdominal, laparoscopic, laparoscopic assisted vaginal, or vaginal. Payments were adjusted to 2013 U.S. dollars to account for change due to inflation.Results-Between 2010 and 2013, there were 386,226 women who underwent hysterectomy. The rate of utilization decreased 12.4%, from 39.9 to 35.0 hysterectomies per 10,000 women. The largest absolute decreases were observed among women less than 55 years and among those with uterine fibroids, abnormal uterine bleeding, and endometriosis. The proportion of laparoscopic hysterectomies increased from 26.1% to 43.4%, with concomitant decreases in abdominal (38.6% to 28.3%), laparoscopic assisted vaginal (20.2 to 16.7%), and vaginal (15.1% to 11.5%) hysterectomies. There was also a shift from inpatient to outpatient surgery. In 2010, the inpatient and outpatient rates of hysterectomy were 26.6 and 13.3 per 10,000 women, respectively. By 2013, the rates were 15.4 and 19.6 per 10,000 women. In each year of analysis, the average reimbursement for outpatient procedures was 44-46% less than for similar inpatient procedures.