Picosecond + Pico Fractioned laser versus traditional quality switched lasers in tattoo removal

Tattooing is increasingly common among adolescents and young adults. This study explores the clinical efficacy of picosecond laser for the correction of tattoos. Literature suggests that 25–47% of the population have had a tattoo at some point in their life (1). The incidence is slightly higher in adults 18–35 years (22–47%) compared to college students (18–25 years of age(1, 2).peer-reviewe

Management interventions for amputation stump neuromas : evidence based review and cost-benefit analysis

Amputation is a common military and civilian surgery with high morbidity. Patients without prostheses due to neuroma pain lose productivity and lifelong contributions, which is often underestimated. The surgical and non-surgical treatment of painful stump neuromas is controversial. An evidence-based assessment and cost-benefit analysis of painful stump neuroma management modalities emphasizes institutional awareness and disruptive technologies. An Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Methodology critical appraisal and structured literature review were used in the research. We found 154 records using a reproducible literature search strategy that included electronic databases and references. A full review of 27 manuscripts after exclusion criteria yielded data for analysis. Surgical, injectable, and electromagnetic spectrum methods were used. Surgical interventions had longer follow-up times than injection and radiofrequency treatments, which affected outcomes. CEBM level 4 evidence dominated primary literature, indicating low quality. No therapy was superior, but the risks varied. Injection therapies like sclerosing alcohol had limited success and side effects. Despite limited evidence, electromagnetic spectrum modalities showed potential. Including direct and indirect costs, amputation stump refitting costs millions annually. Compared to outpatient non-surgical interventions, laser therapy could save a lot of money. According to the study, surgical interventions are common but expensive and have limited functional success. Low-risk non-surgical methods like co-ablation, pulsed radiofrequency, and transcutaneous laser therapy have mixed results. The short follow-up of all non-surgical studies seems to limit them. Follow-up duration is crucial to outcome assessment. Long-term, low-risk laser-induced thermotherapy is promising for future research. This study emphasizes the need for more research and the economic benefits of disruptive technologies in treating painful stump neuromas.peer-reviewe

Cost-benefit analysis of cutaneous laser surgery in secondary burn reconstruction

Thermal disease presents a major burden to individual patient morbidity, healthcare cost as well as to over all economy. Burns also also represent a significant per-patient utlilisation of finite healthcare resources. Secondary complications in these patients, such as multiple drug resistant organisms, may have a devastating effect.peer-reviewe

Historical influence on the practice of chiropractic radiology: part II - thematic analysis on the opinions of diplomates of the American Chiropractic College of Radiology about the future

Background: Over the past 20 years, various authors have addressed the question of the future of chiropractic. Most were positive about the future, with some advocating evidence-based practice and integration with mainstream healthcare, some advocating continued separation with an emphasis on subluxation-based care or the traditional/historical paradigm of chiropractic, and some calling for tolerance and unity. No papers were found specifically inquiring about the future of chiropractic radiology. Methods: The study population consisted of all current members of the American Chiropractic College of Radiology (ACCR), estimated at 190 people, known as chiropractic radiologists or Diplomates of the American Chiropractic Board of Radiology (DACBRs). An internet-based, anonymous survey using SurveyMonkey was implemented, supplemented by hard copies distributed at a conference. The main point of interest for this paper is the final item of the overall questionnaire. This item inquired about the future of chiropractic radiology. Thematic analysis was used on the responses, coded in both constructionist and inductive ways to extract both a general outlook and more specific themes. The inductive themes were also assigned secondarily to a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) analysis. Results: The overall response rate to the survey was 38% (73/190); within the group of respondents, 71 of 73 (98%) answered the item that is the subject of this paper. Opinions on the outlook for chiropractic radiology in the future were more negative than positive, with 14 respondents giving a positive outlook, 26 negative, and 14 non-committal. 28 respondents advocated integration with the wider healthcare community, 11 recommended emphasising separateness or a focus on working within chiropractic, and 15 did not express an opinion on this issue. Ten strengths were noted, 11 weaknesses, 57 opportunities, and 30 threats. Conclusions: The increasing necessity of demonstrating evidence for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in healthcare makes it likely that chiropractic radiologists and the wider chiropractic profession will need to take a more active position on evidence-based practice. Re-evaluation of guidelines and legislation as well as enforcement policies and practices will be necessary. The consequences of failing to do so may include increased marginalisation and reduced viability as a profession