A Review of 105 Consecutive Uniport Endoscopic Plantar Fascial Release Procedures for the Treatment of Chronic Plantar Fasciitis

Plantar fasciitis is a common cause of heel pain in the U.S. Army soldier, resulting in a significant loss of man hours. Given the heavy operations tempo of the U.S. military, successful treatment options need to be considered and used as quickly as possible. Plantar fasciitis can be successfully treated in up to 90% of patients using conservative measures. Operative intervention might need to be considered for those in whom conservative measures have failed. The present report is a review of 105 consecutive uniport endoscopic plantar fascial release procedures performed by the principal investigator during a 9-year period. The following data were collected and analyzed: gender, age, weight, height, body mass index, medical treatment facility, procedure laterality, preoperative pain levels, postoperative pain levels at 3 months, first ambulatory day in the controlled ankle motion boot, return to activity as tolerated, and complications. Three major points were of interest: evidence of improvement in chronic plantar fasciitis when treated with uniport endoscopic procedures; the patient attributes associated with self-reported pain levels 90 days postoperatively; and the patient attributes associated with the average time until patients were able to return to activities as tolerated in a controlled ankle motion boot. It was noted that 44.5% of those with a body mass index of 29.80 kg/m2 or greater reported a postoperative pain level of 0; and 96.3% of those with a body mass index of 25.53 kg/m2 or less reported postoperative pain levels of 0. The analyzed data were used to characterize the clinical outcomes of the procedure, identify changes in outcome with surgeon experience, and identify whether certain patient subgroups have better outcomes, allowing surgeons to identify which patient might be the best candidates for an endoscopic release procedure

A Review of 105 Consecutive Uniport Endoscopic Plantar Fascial Release Procedures for the Treatment of Chronic Plantar Fasciitis

Plantar fasciitis is a common cause of heel pain in the U.S. Army soldier, resulting in a significant loss of man hours. Given the heavy operations tempo of the U.S. military, successful treatment options need to be considered and used as quickly as possible. Plantar fasciitis can be successfully treated in up to 90% of patients using conservative measures. Operative intervention might need to be considered for those in whom conservative measures have failed. The present report is a review of 105 consecutive uniport endoscopic plantar fascial release procedures performed by the principal investigator during a 9-year period. The following data were collected and analyzed: gender, age, weight, height, body mass index, medical treatment facility, procedure laterality, preoperative pain levels, postoperative pain levels at 3 months, first ambulatory day in the controlled ankle motion boot, return to activity as tolerated, and complications. Three major points were of interest: evidence of improvement in chronic plantar fasciitis when treated with uniport endoscopic procedures; the patient attributes associated with self-reported pain levels 90 days postoperatively; and the patient attributes associated with the average time until patients were able to return to activities as tolerated in a controlled ankle motion boot. It was noted that 44.5% of those with a body mass index of 29.80 kg/m2 or greater reported a postoperative pain level of 0; and 96.3% of those with a body mass index of 25.53 kg/m2 or less reported postoperative pain levels of 0. The analyzed data were used to characterize the clinical outcomes of the procedure, identify changes in outcome with surgeon experience, and identify whether certain patient subgroups have better outcomes, allowing surgeons to identify which patient might be the best candidates for an endoscopic release procedure

Chapter 8 Stakeholders' normative notions of sustainability

Chapter 8 = Many fisheries world-wide are not operating sustainably. Returning to sustainable levels is challenging as fisheries are embedded in complex marine social-ecological systems and bringing the system back to a path of sustainability will likely involve conflicts and tough choices. A first step towards a path of sustainability relates to understanding the (different) normative notions of sustainability held by different stakeholder groups. We use the (German) Western Baltic Sea as a case study to elicit these normative views. At a workshop with representatives of relevant stakeholder groups, we conducted a questionnaire-based survey. Questions were inspired by the stochastic-viability-conceptualization of strong ecological-economic sustainability under uncertainty. The survey focused on sustainability as a normative goal for fisheries management from a societal perspective. It returns quantitative results which can be directly utilized in fisheries management. We find considerable variation across as well as within stakeholder groups in their normative views on sustainability. Still, it seems to be consensus among all stakeholders that the different groups have legitimate claims to the Western Baltic Sea, providing common ground on how to 28 sustainably use the WBS, and a well-designed transdisciplinary approach with broad exchange between different stakeholders and science seems useful to steer the WBS into a sustainable future

Embedding Changemaker Skills and Social Innovation into Design Student Learning

Building on entrepreneurship education and the United Kingdom (UK) government review on creativity in business, this paper discusses a case study of a funded project to develop design students' future skills by collaborating on transitioning student projects into start-up venture and commercialisation for the common good. Undergraduate students are shown to gain insights from different faculties and each other’s subject expertise using a variety of set activities throughout the academic year to challenge and support them. The learning for students included scheduled workshops with the possibility of new venture creation based on the new product development (NPD) methodology, student networking and applying their soft skills in a new context. Four workshop tasks (Enterprise, innovation and you, enterprise development, prototyping and venture articulation) were developed for this project and visualised in a route map. The collaboration of product design students with entrepreneurship students has been observed at the commencement stage, during and after the experience to understand their personal development and identify key learnings captured through opinion polls, focus groups and observation. Triangulation resulted through focus group and feedback from wider project team and academics reflecting on learning models in design/engineering versus entrepreneurship/business. This project is timely due to its year-long inter-faculty student experience during a pandemic using and developing ‘changemaker’ competencies and social innovation

Hard Cases of Comparison

In hard cases of comparison, people are faced with two options neither of which is conceived of as better, worse, or equally good compared to the other. Most philosophers claim that hard cases (1) can indeed be distinguished from cases in which two options are equally good, and (2) can be characterized by a failure of transitive reasoning. It is a much more controversial matter and at the heart of an ongoing debate, whether the options in hard cases of comparison should be interpreted as incomparable, on par, or roughly equal. So far, however, none of these claims and interpretations have been tested. This paper presents the first empirical investigation on hard cases, intransitive reasoning, and incomparability. Our results reveal that hard cases present real-world dilemmas in which a significant majority of people violate transitivity. After suggesting a way of operationalizing the notion of incomparability, we provide empirical evidence that the options in some hard cases are not considered to be incomparable. Theories of rough equality or parity seem to provide better interpretations of our results