Combined ACL and ALL reconstruction was found to be effective in improving subjective and objective outcomes. Nevertheless, these findings were not significantly superior to isolated ACL reconstruction except for the instrumented knee laxity testing results. This might indicate that ALL reconstruction should not be performed routinely for patients undergoing ACL reconstruction.

BackgroundWorldwide, patients are the cornerstone of bedside teaching of medical students. In this study, the authors aimed to assess patients’ acceptability toward medical students in teaching hospitals of the Faculty of Medicine of Kuwait University.MethodsNinehundred and ninety five patients were approached in 14 teaching hospitals; 932 patients agreed to participate (refusal rate is 6.3%). A self-administered questionnaire was used to collect data.ResultsIn general, higher acceptance of students by patients was found when there is no direct contact between the patient and the student (e.g., reading patients’ files, presenting in outpatient clinic, observing doctors performing examination or procedures) compared to other situations (e.g., performing physical examination or procedures). Pediatrics patients showed higher acceptance of students compared to patients in other specialties, while Obstetrics/Gynecology patients showed the highest refusal of students. Gender of patients (especially females) and students appeared to affect the degree of acceptance of medical students by patients. Majority of the patients (436; 46.8%) believed that the presence of medical students in hospitals improves the quality of health care.ConclusionPatients are an important factor of bedside teaching. Clinical tutors must take advantage of patients who accept medical students. Clinical tutors and medical students should master essential communication skills to convince patients in accepting students, thus improving bedside teaching. Also, using simulation and standardization should be considered to address scenarios that most patients are unwilling to allow students to participate.

BackgroundChoosing a medical specialty can be either a daunting and confusing experience for some medical students and junior doctors or a foregone conclusion to others. The aim of this study is to evaluate factors affecting future specialty choice among medical students in Kuwait University.MethodsA self-administered questionnaire was used to collect data from medical students registered in Kuwait University during the academic year 2011/2012. Chi-square test and logistic regression were used to test the association between deciding a future specialty and students’ sociodemographic and academic factors.ResultsOf the 422 students approached, 387 (91.7%) decided to participate. A total of 144 (37.2%) students made a decision regarding their choice of future medical specialty. Pediatrics, general surgery, and cardiology were the most desired specialties – 18 (12.5%), 17 (11.8%), and 16 (11.1%) students requested these specialties, respectively. Only 61 (42.4%) of those who selected a future specialty received advice regarding their choice. Looking for a good treatment outcome for patients (66; 45.8%) and a challenging specialty (58; 40.3%) were the most influencing incentives when selecting a future specialty. Students in the clinical phase of their study were 3.014 (95% CI: 1.498–6.065) more likely to report on their decision regarding a future specialty compared to students in the basic medical sciences phase (p=0.002).ConclusionA variety of factors appeared to inspire medical students in Kuwait to choose a future medical specialty. When identified, these factors can be used by mentors of medical students and directors of residency training programs to motivate students to choose specialties that are limited in Kuwait.

Purpose To compare the outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with those of combined ACL and anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction in ACL-deicient knees. The objective of this study was to improve knowledge regarding the treatment of ACL-deicient knees with combined ACL and ALL reconstruction. Combined ACL and ALL reconstruction has been hypothesized to result in better clinical and functional outcomes than isolated ACL reconstruction (ACLR). Methods One-hundred and seven adult male athletes with ACL tears and high-grade pivot shifts were randomized into two groups. Those in group A (n = 54) underwent ACLR, while those in group B (n = 53) underwent combined ACL and ALL reconstruction. The median age was 26 (18-40) and 24 (18-33) years in groups A and B, respectively, and the median followup was 60 (55-65) months. Physical examination indings, instrumented knee laxity tested using a KT-1000 arthrometer, and International Knee Documentation Committee Scale (IKDC) scores were used to evaluate the outcomes. Results One-hundred and two patients were available for follow-up: 52 in group A and 50 in group B. Postoperatively, the pivot shift was normal in 43 (82.7%) and 48 (96%) patients in groups A and B, respectively (p < 0.001). The median instrumented knee laxity was 2.5 ± 0.7 (1.2-6.1) mm in patients in group A and 1.2 ± 0.7 (1.2-3.2) mm in patients in group B (p < 0.001). Additionally, 44 (84.6%) patients in group A had normal IKDC scores and 3 (5.8%) had nearly normal scores, while 48 (96.0%) patients in group B had normal IKDC scores and 2 (4%) had nearly normal scores (p < 0.001). Conclusion Combined ACL and ALL reconstruction, compared with isolated ACLR resulted in favourable clinical and functional outcomes, as demonstrated by decreased rotational instability and instrumented knee laxity, a lower graft rupture rate and better postoperative IKDC scores. Level of evidence 1.

Intratunnel femoral fixation of the double-bundle ACL graft from the cross-pin fixation technique provided better instrumented knee laxity results than did the extratunnel femoral fixation with cortical buttons. Future larger studies comparing these 2 techniques should be conducted to ensure the availability of stronger evidence supporting the findings of this study.

BackgroundIntra-articular osteoid osteoma (OO) causes irreversible joint damage. Its treatment of choice is radiofrequency ablation (RFA); however, some areas of the acetabulum are hard to access. Therefore, hip arthroscopy was used to treat this tumor. We aim to systematically review the literature with regards to arthroscopic management of acetabular OO, and to report a further case in which hip arthroscopy was used for treatment.MethodsPubMed and EMBASE were searched for articles relevant to the arthroscopic management of acetabular OO on December 2, 2014. All articles published on and before that date were reviewed, and studies which met our pre-determined inclusion criteria were included. Articles screening and data abstraction were done by two reviewers independently. We also presented a 31-year-old man with acetabular OO who underwent hip arthroscopy for the management of his tumor after failing to respond to medications and computed tomography scan (CT)-guided RFA.ResultsThe initial search revealed 14 studies, of which ten met our inclusion criteria. A total of ten patients underwent hip arthroscopy for the management of acetabular OO. Only two patients were females, and the patients' age ranged from 7 to 47 years. Two patients underwent arthroscopic guided-RFA of the lesion, while the rest underwent excision. The follow-up period ranged from 6 months to 2 years. Success rate was 100 %, and no recurrence was reported. Minor complications (transient impotence and perineal numbness) developed in one patient (10 %). Arthroscopic-guided RFA failed to eliminate the tumor in our additional case. A second trial of CT-guided RFA was successful in treating the patient's condition.ConclusionsHip arthroscopy is an effective and safe option for the management of acetabular OO, with success rate exceeding 90 %. Studies of higher level of evidence are required.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12891-015-0779-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract

3.