Search

Background: There is a need to better understand the overall state of sub-specialization in physical medicine and rehabilitation (PM&R)., Objective: To examine the status and trends in subspecialty certification for each of the seven subspecialties approved for American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (ABPMR) diplomates., Design/setting: Retrospective analysis of deidentified information from the ABPMR database., Participants: Physicians certified by ABPMR through 2019., Interventions: Not applicable., Main Outcome Measures: For each subspecialty, we examined: (1) the number of certificates issued to ABPMR diplomates; (2) the recertification rate; (3) the yearly trends for total active, new, and expired certificates; and (4) for ABPMR-administered subspecialties, recertification rates for those entering the subspecialty through fellowship completion versus a "grandfathered" practice pathway., Results: Of 11,421 ABPMR diplomates in the United States in 2019, a total of 3560 (31.2%) had 3985 active subspecialty certificates. Pain Medicine (PM) was the most common subspecialty certification (15.5% of all ABPMR diplomates) followed by Sports Medicine (SM, 6.6%), Brain Injury Medicine (BIM, 4.8%), Spinal Cord Injury Medicine (SCIM, 4.2%), Pediatric Rehabilitation Medicine (PRM, 2.5%), Neuromuscular Medicine (NMM, 0.7%), and Hospice and Palliative Medicine (HPM, 0.5%). For diplomates with more than one subspecialty certification, PM and SM was the most frequent combination. Both the recertification rate and the end of practice track eligibility influenced certification trends differently for individual subspecialties. The average number of new certificates added annually for every subspecialty was higher before than after the temporary practice track-based eligibility ended; the difference was statistically significant (p < .05) for SCIM, PM, SM, and NMM. The recertification rate for all subspecialties combined was 73.4%. For the subspecialties (SCIM, PRM) for which these data were available, fellowship candidates had higher recertification rates than those grandfathered through a practice track., Conclusion: This report informs stakeholders about the state and evolution of subspecialty certification in PM&R over time., (© 2022 American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation.)

Background: (+)-Epicatechin (EPI) induces mitochondrial biogenesis and antioxidant metabolism in muscle fibers and neurons. We aimed to evaluate safety and efficacy of (+)-EPI in pediatric subjects with Friedreich's ataxia (FRDA)., Methods: This was a phase II, open-label, baseline-controlled single-center trial including 10 participants ages 10 to 22 with confirmed FA diagnosis. (+)-EPI was administered orally at 75 mg/d for 24 weeks, with escalation to 150 mg/d at 12 weeks for subjects not showing improvement of neuromuscular, neurological or cardiac endpoints. Neurological endpoints were change from baseline in Friedreich's Ataxia Rating Scale (FARS) and 8-m timed walk. Cardiac endpoints were changes from baseline in left ventricular (LV) structure and function by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and echocardiogram, changes in cardiac electrophysiology, and changes in biomarkers for heart failure and hypertrophy., Results: Mean FARS/modified (m)FARS scores showed nonstatistically significant improvement by both group and individual analysis. FARS/mFARS scores improved in 5/9 subjects (56%), 8-m walk in 3/9 (33%), 9-peg hole test in 6/10 (60%). LV mass index by cardiac MRI was significantly reduced at 12 weeks (P = .045), and was improved in 7/10 (70%) subjects at 24 weeks. Mean LV ejection fraction was increased at 24 weeks (P = .008) compared to baseline. Mean maximal septal thickness by echocardiography was increased at 24 weeks (P = .031). There were no serious adverse events., Conclusion: (+)-EPI was well tolerated over 24 weeks at up to 150 mg/d. Improvement was observed in cardiac structure and function in subset of subjects with FRDA without statistically significant improvement in primary neurological outcomes., Synopsis: A (+)-epicatechin showed improvement of cardiac function, nonsignificant reduction of FARS/mFARS scores, and sustained significant upregulation of muscle-regeneration biomarker follistatin., (© 2020 SSIEM.)

Background: Certification by the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (ABPMR) requires passing both a written multiple choice examination (Part I) and an oral examination (Part II), but it has been unclear whether the two examinations measure the same or different dimensions of knowledge., Objective: To evaluate the concordance between the Part I and Part II examinations for ABPMR initial certification with regard to candidate performance on the examinations and their subsets. Our question is whether the Part II examination provides additional assessment of a candidate beyond what Part I provides., Design: Retrospective psychometric evaluation of deidentified board examination scores., Setting: ABPMR database of Part I and Part II examination scores., Participants: Candidates for the ABPMR Part I and Part II examinations after 2005, with a more detailed analysis of candidates for the Part I examination from 2014 to 2016. Examination scores of candidates who took the Part II examination both before and after the examination was standardized in 2005 were also used for an additional analysis., Methods: Correlations, simple linear regressions, and principal components analysis., Main Outcome Measurements: Correlation coefficients, variance analysis, and unexplained variance in the principal components analysis., Results: There is a weak to moderate correlation between performance on the Part I and Part II examinations: r = 0.33, P < .001. There is an additional dimension of assessment that is demonstrated on the Part II examination, with this being primarily in the domains of systems-based practice and interpersonal communication skills., Conclusion: The Part I and Part II examinations, although with some overlap, contribute different and meaningful components to the overall evaluation of candidates for board certification in PM&R., Level of Evidence: III., (© 2019 American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation.)

Background: Posterior lumbar vertebral endplate fracture occurs with avulsion of the ring apophysis from the posterior vertebral body. Although this has been described in adolescents and young adults, proper diagnosis is often delayed or missed entirely. Surgery may be curative., Objective: To determine the common clinical features and treatment outcomes in youth and young adults with posterior lumbar vertebral endplate fractures., Design: Retrospective case series., Setting: Academic medical institution., Patients: Patients 10 to 25 years old from 2000 through 2012 with posterior vertebral endplate fracture diagnosis., Main Outcome Measurements: Demographic characteristics, diagnostic studies, interventions, and change in symptoms postoperatively., Results: A total of 16 patients had posterior vertebral endplate fractures (8 male patients; mean age, 15.2 years)-8.3% of 192 patients with inclusion age range undergoing spinal surgery for causes unrelated to trauma, scoliosis, or malignancy. The most common signs and symptoms were low back and radiating leg pain, positive straight leg raise, hamstring contracture, and abnormal gait. Cause was sports related for 12 patients (75%). Mean (range) time to diagnosis was 13.0 (3.0-63.0) months. Diagnosis was most commonly made with lumbar magnetic resonance imaging (n = 6). Most fractures occurred at L5 (n = 8, 50%) and L4 (n = 5, 31.3%). Conservative measures were trialed before surgery. Nine patients had "complete relief" following surgery and seven "improved.", Conclusions: Posterior vertebral endplate fracture should be considered in differential diagnosis of a youth or young adult with back pain, radiating leg pain, and limited knee extension, regardless of symptom onset. For patients in whom conservative management fails, consultation with an experienced physician whose practice specializes in spine medicine is recommended., Level of Evidence: IV., (© 2018 American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation.)

Background: Maintenance of certification (MOC) in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation is a process of lifelong learning that begins after successfully completing an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited residency and passing the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (ABPMR) Part I and Part II Examinations. We seek to identify factors predictive of successful MOC Examination performance., Objective: To identify characteristics predictive of successful completion on the ABPMR MOC Examination., Design: Retrospective review., Setting: American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation database review., Participants: 4,545 diplomates who completed the MOC Examination between January 2006 and December 2017., Methods: MOC Examination performance was the primary outcome variable. Performance on Part I and Part II Examinations were independent variables. Additional potential predictors evaluated included year of MOC cycle in which examination was taken, years of practice since residency completion, age, and subspecialty certification., Main Outcome Measures: Performance on MOC Examination., Results: Age at time of MOC Examination was inversely correlated with examination score (r = -0.14, P < .001). Similarly, as time since completion of residency training increased, MOC scores declined. Passing the Part I Examination on first attempt predicted a 98% MOC pass rate, compared to 90% for those who failed initially. MOC performance was highly correlated with Part I performance (r = 0.59, P < .001) and Part II performance (r = 0.32, P < .001). Although MOC performance was similar for those taking the examination in years 7 - 10 of their cycle (97% pass rate), those taking the examination after more than 10 years of the cycle had a significantly lower performance (85% pass rate, P < .01)., Conclusions: Better performance on the MOC Examination is associated with better performance on Part I and Part II Examinations, taking the examination earlier in the 10 year cycle, younger age, and less time since completion of training. Diplomates who are at higher risk for failing the examination may need to prepare differently for MOC Exam than those who are more likely to pass., Level of Evidence: III., (Copyright © 2018 American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Pediatric rehabilitation medicine (PRM) physicians enter the field via several pathways. It is unknown whether different training pathways impact performance on the American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (ABPMR) PRM Examination and Maintenance of Certification (MOC) Examination., Objectives: To describe the examination performance of candidates on the ABPMR PRM Examination according to their type of training (physiatrists with a clinical PRM focus, accredited or unaccredited fellowship training, separate pediatric and physical medicine and rehabilitation residencies, or combined pediatrics/physical medicine and rehabilitation residencies) and to compare candidates' performance on the PRM Examination with their initial ABPMR certification and MOC Examinations., Design: A retrospective cohort study., Setting: American Board of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation office., Participants: A total of 250 candidates taking the PRM subspecialty certification examination from 2003 to 2015., Methods: Scaled scores on the PRM Examination were compared to the examinees' initial certification scores as well as their admissibility criteria. Pass rates and scaled scores also were compared for those taking their initial PRM certification versus MOC., Main Outcome Measurements: Board pass rates and mean scaled scores for initial PRM Examination and MOC., Results: The 250 physiatrists who took the subspecialty PRM Examination had an overall first-time pass rate of 89%. There was no significant difference between first-time PRM pass rates or mean scaled scores for individuals who completed an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited fellowship versus those who did not. First time PRM pass rates were greatest among those who were also certified by the American Board of Pediatrics (100%). Performance on Parts I and II of the initial ABPMR Certification Examination significantly predicted PRM Examination scores. There was no difference in mean scaled scores for initial PRM certification versus taking the PRM Examination for MOC., Conclusions: Several pathways to admissibility to the PRM Examination afforded similar opportunity for diplomates to gain the knowledge necessary to pass the PRM Examination. Once certified, physicians taking the PRM Examination for MOC have a high success rate of passing again in years 7-10 of their certification cycle., Level of Evidence: III., (Copyright © 2018 American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Chronic pain in children and adolescents can be difficult for a single provider to manage in a busy clinical setting. Part of this difficulty is that pediatric chronic pain not only impacts the child but also the families of these children. In this review article, we discuss etiology and pathophysiology of chronic pain, along with variables that impact the severity of chronic pain and functional loss. We review diagnosis and management of selected chronic pain conditions in pediatric patients, including headache, low back pain, hypermobility, chronic fatigue, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome, abdominal pain, fibromyalgia, and complex regional pain syndrome. For each condition, we create a road map that contains therapy prescriptions, exercise recommendations, and variables that may influence pain severity. Potential medications for these pain conditions and associated symptoms are reviewed. A multidisciplinary approach for managing children with these conditions, including pediatric pain rehabilitation programs, is emphasized. Lastly, we discuss psychological factors and interventions for pediatric chronic pain and potential complementary and alternative natural products and interventions., (Copyright © 2015 American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

After obesity rates in youth reached alarming rates, public health officials recognized the need for specific physical activity guidelines for children and adolescents. Numerous health care groups and sports and fitness organizations collaborated on the development of the Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans in 2008, which have been widely endorsed and include recommendations for the pediatric population. Children and adolescents should participate in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity 1 or more hours per day and muscle and bone-strengthening activities 3 or more times per week. Physical activities should be age appropriate, enjoyable, and varied and occur beyond what is required for typical activities of daily living. Adequate exercise in youth improves strength, cardiorespiratory fitness, and body composition and therefore decreases cardiovascular risk factors. An improved cardiovascular profile provides a continued benefit in adulthood. Exercise also improves bone health, psychological well-being, cognition, and school performance and may decrease the risk of sports injury. Exercise habits established in childhood often continue into adulthood., (Copyright © 2012 American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Cartilage repair by autologous periosteal arthroplasty is enhanced by continuous passive motion (CPM) of the joint after transplantation of the periosteal graft. However, the mechanisms by which CPM stimulate chondrogenesis are unknown. Based on the observation that an oscillating intra-synovial pressure fluctuation has been reported to occur during CPM (0.6-10 kPa), it was hypothesized that the oscillating pressure experienced by the periosteal graft as a result of CPM has a beneficial effect on the chondrogenic response of the graft. We have developed an in vitro model with which dynamic fluid pressures (DFP) that mimic those during CPM can be applied to periosteal explants while they are cultured in agarose gel suspension. In this study periosteal explants were treated with or without DFP during suspension culture in agarose, which is conducive to chondrogenesis. Different DFP application times (30 min, 4 h, 24 h/day) and pressure magnitudes (13, 103 kPa or stepwise 13 to 54 to 103 kPa) were compared for their effects on periosteal chondrogenesis. Low levels of DFP (13 kPa at 0.3 Hz) significantly enhanced chondrogenesis over controls (34 +/- 7% vs 14 +/- 5%; P < 0.05), while higher pressures (103 kPa at 0.3 Hz) completely inhibited chondrogenesis, as determined from the percentage of tissue that was determined to be cartilage by histomorphometry. Application of low levels of DFP to periosteal explants also resulted in significantly increased concentrations of Collagen Type II protein (43 +/- 8% vs 10 +/- 5%; P < 0.05). New proteoglycan synthesis, as measured by 35S-sulphate uptake was increased by 30% in periosteal explants stimulated with DFP (350 +/- 50 DPM vs 250 +/- 75 DPM of 35S-sulphate uptake/microg total protein), when compared to controls though this difference was not statistically significant. The DFP effect at low levels was dose-dependant for time of application as well, with 4 h/day stimulation causing significantly higher chondrogenesis than just 30 min/day (34 +/- 7 vs 12 +/- 4% cartilage; P < 0.05) and not significantly less than that obtained with 24 h/day of DFP (48 +/- 9% cartilage, P > 0.05). These observations may partially explain the beneficial effect on cartilage repair by CPM. They also validate an in vitro model permitting studies aimed at elucidating the mechanisms of action of mechanical factors regulating chondrogenesis. The fact that these tissues were successfully cultured in a mechanical environment for six weeks makes it possible to study the actions of mechanical factors on the entire chondrogenic pathway, from induction to maturation. Finally, these data support the theoretical predictions regarding the role of hydrostatic compression in fracture healing.