Wheat.....A Major Cash Crop in Texas.

24 p

YouTube as a source of patient education information for elbow ulnar collateral ligament injuries: a quality control content analysis

Background While online orthopedic resources are becoming an increasingly popular avenue for patient education, videos on YouTube are not subject to peer review. The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to evaluate the quality of YouTube videos for patient education in ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) injuries of the elbow. Methods A search of keywords for UCL injury was conducted through the YouTube search engine. Each video was categorized by source and content. Video quality, reliability, and accuracy were assessed by two independent raters using five metrics: (1) Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria (range 0–4) for video reliability; (2) modified DISCERN score (range 1–5) for video reliability; (3) Global Quality Score (GQS; range 1–5) for video quality; (4) ulnar collateral ligament-specific score (UCL-SS; range 0–16), a novel score for comprehensiveness of health information presented; and (5) accuracy score (AS; range 1-3) for accuracy. Results Video content was comprised predominantly of disease-specific information (52%) and surgical technique (33%). The most common video sources were physician (42%) and commercial (23%). The mean JAMA score, modified DISCERN score, GQS, UCL-SS, and AS were 1.8, 2.4, 1.9, 5.3, and 2.7 respectively. Conclusions Overall, YouTube is not a reliable or high-quality source for patients seeking information regarding UCL injuries, especially with videos uploaded by non-physician sources. The multiplicity of low quality, low reliability, and irrelevant videos can create a cumbersome and even inaccurate learning experience for patients

Building better Sex Robots: Lessons from Feminist Pornography

How should we react to the development of sexbot technology? Taking their cue from anti-porn feminism, several academic critics lament the development of sexbot technology, arguing that it objectifies and subordinates women, is likely to promote misogynistic attitudes toward sex, and may need to be banned or restricted. In this chapter I argue for an alternative response. Taking my cue from the sex positive ‘feminist porn’ movement, I argue that the best response to the development of ‘bad’ sexbots is to make better ones. This will require changes to the content, process and context of sexbot development. Doing so will acknowledge the valuable role that technology can play in human sexuality, and allow us to challenge gendered norms and assumptions about male and female sexual desire. This will not be a panacea to the social problems that could arise from sexbot development, but it offers a more realistic and hopeful vision for the future of this technology in a pluralistic and progressive society

Fixation of osteochondral fragments in the human knee using Meniscus Arrows®

The aim of this study is to compare the hold in bone of Meniscus Arrows® and Smart Nails®, followed by the report of the results of the clinical application of Meniscus Arrows® as fixation devices. First, pull-out tests were performed to analyse the holdfast of both nails in bone. Statistical analysis showed no significant difference; therefore, the thinner Meniscus Arrow® was chosen as fixation device in the patient series of two patients with a symptomatic Osteochondritis dissecans fragment and three patients with an osteochondral fracture of a femur condyle. The cartilage margins were glued with Tissuecoll®. All fragments consolidated. Second look arthroscopy in three patients showed fixed fragments with stable, congruent cartilage edges. At an average follow-up period of 5 years no pain, effusion, locking, restricted range of motion or signs of osteoarthritis were reported. Based on the results of the pull-out tests and available clinical studies, Meniscus Arrows® and Smart Nails® are both likely to perform adequately as fixation devices in the treatment of Osteochondritis dissecans and osteochondral fractures in the knee. They both provide the advantage of one stage surgery. However, based on their smaller diameter, the Meniscus Arrows® should be preferred for this indication