March 17, 2020 at 9:48 am #8441Eric MagrumKeymaster
Good Morning all
Sorry we had to modify the Running Medicine Conference this year, including scrapping Saturday labs.
Please post 2-4 key points that you learning; and will integrate into clinical practice.
Thanks – hope for a group hug in the next few weeks (or months)
Be safe, be smart, be socially responsible
March 19, 2020 at 7:10 pm #8442awilson12Participant
– Great review of the anatomy and pathology of the foot and ankle that will help me with a more encompassing scope of differentials and better identify some of the pathologies discussed.
– Super helpful to go over a systematic approach to treadmill running analysis, and also relate that to research on effects of altering these parameters for a specific purpose in regards to patient presentation.
– Also will add some of the “physical performance tests” to my functional assessment to help with identifying contributing impairments to help guide treatment.
March 19, 2020 at 9:05 pm #8443lacarrollParticipant
1) The “S”’s of treadmill analysis- this is SO HELPFUL. I feel like this gives me a solid framework to systematically evaluate someone’s gait so that I can be more consistent with my assessment and be more confident that I’m making good recommendations based on what I’m seeing.
2) Nerve hydrodissection – what’s actually happening in the tissue and indications for it/what to expect afterwards
3) Really great review of the common nerve entrapments, anatomy review of lower leg and ankle/foot; definitely helps broaden my differential list and potential areas of compression
March 20, 2020 at 8:29 am #8444Taylor BlattenbergerParticipant
1) I really enjoyed the review of neural structures in the foot and how they may present when they become symptomatic. Seeing all that again really broadened my differential diagnosis list for the foot especially when faced with a difficult plantar heel pain case. I actually utilized this this week. It didn’t produce any positives, but I felt better that I ruled these things out.
2) Chris Johnson did a great job of simplifying the analysis of running and really highlighting the glaring things we should focus on vs. the things that may not be important to change. I don’t see many runners in my current practice, but I will keep the S’s in my back pocket if I am ever treating this population.
3) I really liked the overview of different functional tests and understanding the way he used them to evaluate readiness to run. I have used some hopping and pogos in previous cases, but using specific tests to preferentially stress other tissues is something I have lacked. I’d like to use these more in my own practice.
March 21, 2020 at 9:52 am #8447Steven LagasseParticipant
-The focus on neuroanatomy was captivating and made me aware that this area warrants a continual review. I’m currently having flashbacks to Lauren’s OMPTS case presentation and the Saphenous nerve. Yikes. Moving forward, I plan to give these structures more weight when practicing in the clinic.
– I treat minimal to no patients who are looking to return to running. Thus, I have little experience with this population. It was nice to receive an in-depth overview of these individuals. I liked how Chris Johnson employed the idea of a minimalist approach when working with these patients. For example, rather than attempting to tearing apart someone’s running gait, it is likely the case that the patient needs a 5-10% increase in cadence.
March 21, 2020 at 12:03 pm #8450pbarrettcolemanParticipant
1) Like everyone else here, the nerve entrapments with typical signs and symptoms was super helpful. Definitely something I’m going to review and get more comfortable with so I can start being better at differential diagnosis with people with foot/ankle pain.
2) I have treated one runner at PRO. Having the simple screening tools that are intuitive for analyzing gait and return to running was super useful and something I can easily have on file and integrate when the time is ready.
3) I liked the Nerve Hydrodissection — particularly the pictures. I feel more competent in understanding the procedure and what a physician would be thinking when choosing to perform.
March 21, 2020 at 5:28 pm #8453helenrshepParticipant
I wish we could have been in person for this and had the lab but it was still awesome with so many good take aways, most notably being:
As everyone mentioned the review of nerves and nerve entrapments in the lower extremity was incredibly helpful. I tend to focus on the major ones so having a comprehensive review will certainly impact my foot/ankle assessment moving forward.
I loved the talk on pediatric sports, especially the importance of rest.
Like Lauren said, the S’s of treadmill running analysis will come in handy in the clinic to give me a framework to base my assessment on as well as the functional tests to determine running readiness.
In general, the diverse group of presenters was awesome. It was really cool to hear from both PTs and non-PTs. I think the surgical perspective gave me a lot of good insight into the non-PT based treatment of some of these conditions.
March 23, 2020 at 11:02 am #8456Michael McMurrayKeymaster
1) Great review of anatomy of the foot including neural contributions/conditions. Will definitely think more about these neural contributions when evaluating the foot/ankle in the future — consider for differential.
2) The S’s of treadmill running was really helpful, I like the breakdown of what is/isn’t important to look for. I also think what he said about “if it isn’t broken don’t fix it” was really important, so often as physical therapists I feel like we look for impairments when they do not always need to be fixed. I thought Chris’s thoughts on cadence were interesting as well as barefoot treadmill running analysis/drills (hopefully can carry this into practice when I am back in clinic).
3) Clinical ultrasound lecture presented by Dr. Hryvniak was great as I was familiar with a lot of the patients he presented on — so helpful to hear his perspective and to be able to work with him. Gaining a better understanding of what he is looking for on ultrasound and where specifically he is injecting was helpful in terms of understanding nerve anatomy and pathological nerve anatomy. After working with him during my internship, I will definitely better consider referral to hydrodissection when deemed appropriate for my future patients.
4) Physical performance and clearance considerations for distance runners presented and suggested by Chris Johnson was quite comprehensive. I would be worried about being efficient enough to look at all of these performance measures but do think they would be very beneficial when considering required performance characteristics for long distance running. I hope in the future to be able to select from this list in order to increase specificity of my examination for runners.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.