The treatment group showed significant improvements in pain, disability, physical function, and quality of life as compared with the sham group. The duration and magnitude of relief was consistent with previous studies, with current results showing benefits extending beyond 9 months.

No abstract

Objective To determine whether fluoroscopic guidance improves outcomes of injections for greater trochanteric pain syndrome.Design Multicentre double blind randomised controlled study.Setting Three academic and military treatment facilities in the United States and Germany.Participants 65 patients with a clinical diagnosis of greater trochanteric pain syndrome.Interventions Injections of corticosteroid and local anaesthetic into the trochanteric bursa, using fluoroscopy (n=32) or landmarks (that is, “blind” injections; n=33) for guidance.Main outcome measures Primary outcome measures: 0-10 numerical rating scale pain scores at rest and with activity at one month (positive categorical outcome predefined as ≥50% pain reduction either at rest or with activity, coupled with positive global perceived effect). Secondary outcome measures included Oswestry disability scores, SF-36 scores, reduction in drug use, and patients’ satisfaction.Results No differences in outcomes occurred favouring either the fluoroscopy or blind treatment groups. One month after injection the average pain scores were 2.7 at rest and 5.0 with activity in the fluoroscopy group compared with 2.2 and 4.0 in the blind injection group. Three months after the injection, 15 (47%) patients in the blind group and 13 (41%) in the fluoroscopy group continued to have a positive outcome.Conclusion Although using fluoroscopic guidance dramatically increases treatment costs for greater trochanteric pain syndrome, it does not necessarily improve outcomes.Trial registration Clinical trials NCT00480675

Existing and emerging methods in computational mechanics are rarely validated against problems with an unknown outcome. For this reason, Sandia National Laboratories, in partnership with US National Science Foundation and Naval Surface Warfare Center Carderock Division, launched a computational challenge in mid-summer, 2012. Researchers and engineers were invited to predict crack initiation and propagation in a simple but novel geometry fabricated from a common off-the-shelf commercial engineering alloy. The goal of this international Sandia Fracture Challenge was to benchmark the capabilities for the prediction of deformation and damage evolution associated with ductile tearing in structural metals, including physics models, computational methods, and numerical implementations currently available in the computational fracture community. Thirteen teams participated, reporting blind predictions for the outcome of the Challenge. The simulations and experiments were performed independently and kept confidential. The methElectronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10704-013-9904-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, USA e-mail: blboyce@sandia.gov ods for fracture prediction taken by the thirteen teams ranged from very simple engineering calculations to complicated multiscale simulations. The wide variation in modeling results showed a striking lack of consistency across research groups in addressing problems of ductile fracture. While some methods were more successful than others, it is clear that the problem of ductile fracture prediction continues to be challenging. Specific areas of deficiency have been identified through this effort. Also, the effort has underscored the need for additional blind prediction-based assessments.

No abstract