No abstract

Introduction. MIDAS is a valid and reliable short questionnaire for assessment of headache related disability. Linguistic validation of Persian MIDAS and assessment of psychometric properties between tension type headache (TTH) and migraine were the aims of this study. Methods. Patients with migraine or TTH were included. At the first visit, we administered a headache symptom questionnaire, MIDAS, and SF-36. Patients filled out MIDAS in second and third visit within three and eight weeks after base line visit. Internal consistency (Cronbach α) and test-retest reproducibility (Spearman correlation coefficient) were used to assess reliability. Convergent validity and MIDAS capability to differentiate between chronic and episodic headaches (migraine and TTH) were also assessed. Results. The 267 participants had episodic migraine (EM-64%), chronic migraine (CM-13.5%), episodic TTH (ETTH-13.5%), and chronic TTH (CTTH-9). Internal consistency reliability was 0.8 for the entire sample, 0.72 for TTH, and 0.82 for migraine. Test-retest reliability for all questions between visit 1 and visit 2 varied from 0.54 to 0.71. Convergent validity was assessed using SF-36 as an external referent. Patients with episodic headaches (EM and ETTH) had significantly lower MIDAS scores than chronic headaches (CM and CTTH). Conclusion. Persian MIDAS is a valid and reliable questionnaire for migraine and TTH that can differentiate between episodic headache and chronic headache.

Persian HIT-6 is a valid and reliable questionnaire for the evaluation of headache. However, it cannot differentiate between chronic migraine, episodic migraine, and TTH in Iranian population.

The press-fit technique is an efficient procedure. Its outcome was comparable with the interference screw group. Furthermore it has unlimited bone-to-bone healing, no need for removal of hardware, ease for revision and cost effectiveness.

BackgroundHip fractures are one of the causes of disability amongst elderly patients. External fixator and skeletal traction are two modes of treatment.ObjectivesThe aim of this study is to compare two different treatment modes for intertrochanteric fractures in elderly patients.Patients and MethodsSixty elderly patients with intertrochanteric fractures were randomized for treatment with either skeletal traction (Group A) or an external fixation (Group B). In this study patients at least 60 years of age, with AO/OTA A1 or A2 type fracture and intertrochanteric fracture as a result of minor trauma, were enrolled.ResultsAcceptable reduction was achieved in eight and 26 patients of group A and B, respectively. The mean duration of hospitalization in Group A and Group B was 14.3 ± 1.1 and 2.2 ± 0.6 days, respectively. Significant differences between the two groups were observed, regarding acceptable reduction and duration of hospitalization. Less pain was observed in group B, at five days and twelve months after surgery; the average HHS was 57 and 66, in group A and B, respectively (P > 0.05).ConclusionsTreatment with an external fixator is an effective treatment modality for intertrochanteric fractures in elderly high-risk patients. The advantages include rapid and simple application, insignificant blood loss, less radiation exposure, adequate fixation, pain reduction, early discharge from the hospital, low cost and more favorable functional outcome.