Office-based ultrasonography has become increasingly available in many settings, and its use to guide joint and soft tissue injections has increased. Numerous studies have been conducted to evaluate the use of ultrasound-guided injections over traditional landmark-guided injections, with a rapid growth in the literature over the past few years. A comprehensive review of the literature was conducted to demonstrate increased accuracy of ultrasound-guided injections regardless of anatomic location. In the upper extremity, ultrasound-guided injections have been shown to provide superior benefit to landmark-guided injections at the glenohumeral joint, the subacromial space, the biceps tendon sheath, and the joints of the hand and wrist. Ultrasound-guided injections of the acromioclavicular and the elbow joints have not been shown to be more efficacious. In the lower extremity, ultrasound-guided injections at the knee, ankle, and foot have superior efficacy to landmark-guided injections. Conclusive evidence is not available regarding improved efficacy of ultrasound-guided injections of the hip, although landmark-guided injection is performed less commonly at the hip joint. Ultrasound-guided injections are overall more accurate than landmark-guided injections. While current studies indicate that ultrasound guidance improves efficacy and cost-effectiveness of many injections, these studies are limited and more research is needed.

Cauda equina syndrome is 1 of a few true surgical emergencies involving the lumbar spine. Although treatment within 48 hours has been found to correlate with improved outcomes, recovery of bowel and bladder control does not always occur, and loss of these functions can be distressing to patients. An understanding of factors affecting the legal outcome can aid the clinician in determining risk management for medicolegal cases of cauda equina syndrome. This study is a retrospective analysis of medicolegal cases involving cauda equina syndrome. The LexisNexis Academic legal search database was used to obtain medicolegal cases of cauda equina syndrome to determine risk factors for adverse decisions for the provider. Outcomes data on trial verdicts were collected, as were associated penalties. Case data were also compiled on age, sex, initial presentation site, initial diagnosis, whether a rectal examination was performed, time to consultation with a specialist, time to completion of advanced imaging study, time to surgery, and neurosurgical vs orthopedic consultation. Based on our study of court cases involving cauda equina syndrome, a positive association was found between time to surgery >48 hours and an adverse decision (P<.05). The actual degree of functional loss did not appear to affect the verdicts. Because 26.7% of the cases involved an initial presentation that included loss of bowel or bladder control, this study emphasizes the importance of cautioning all patients with spinal complaints of the potential risk for cauda equina syndrome.

Despite the increase in diversity in the orthopaedic workforce during the past 15 years, ethnic and gender disparities persist among orthopaedic residency programs regarding residents, clinical faculty, and basic research faculty. To increase diversity in orthopaedic residency programs, an emphasis on recruiting ethnic and gender minority candidates needs to become a priority in the orthopaedic academic community.

A concise and thorough approach to assessment in the general ENT clinic will provide the diagnosis and facilitate the management of the hoarse voice in the majority of cases. Voice therapy is an important tool that should be utilised in the general ENT clinic and should not be restricted to the specialist voice clinic. If there is no improvement after initial measures, the larynx appears normal and/or the patient has failed initial speech & language therapy, referral to a specialist voice clinic may be helpful. More research is still required particularly with regard to laryngopharyngeal reflux which is often cited as an important cause of hoarseness but is still poorly understood.

Spinal epidural hematoma and spinal epidural abscess are rare surgical emergencies resulting in significant neurologic deficits. Making the diagnosis for spinal epidural hematoma and spinal epidural abscess can be challenging; however, a delay in recognition and treatment can be devastating. The objective of this retrospective analysis study was to identify risk factors for an adverse outcome for the provider. The LexisNexis Academic legal search database was used to identify a total of 19 cases of spinal epidural hematoma and spinal epidural abscess filed against medical providers. Outcome data on trial verdicts, age, sex, initial site of injury, time to consultation, time to appropriate imaging studies, time to surgery, and whether a rectal examination was performed or not were recorded. The results demonstrated a significant association between time to surgery more than 48 hours and an unfavorable verdict for the provider. The degree of permanent neurologic impairment did not appear to affect the verdicts. Fifty-eight percent of the cases did not present with an initial deficit, including loss of bowel or bladder control. All medical professionals must maintain a high level of suspicion and act quickly. Physicians who are able to identify early clinical features, appropriately image, and treat within a 48 hour time frame have demonstrated a more favorable medicolegal outcome compared with their counterparts in filed lawsuits for spinal epidural hematoma and spinal epidural abscess cases.