Femoral neck fractures (FNFs) in young patients usually result from high-energy violence, and the vertical transcervical type is typically challenging for its instability. FNFs are commonly treated with three cannulated screws (CS), but the role of screws type on fixation effects (FE) is unclear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the FE of ten types of CS with different diameters, lengths, depths, and pitches of thread via finite element analysis which was validated by a biomechanical test. Ten vertical FNF models were grouped, fixed by ten types of CS, respectively, all in a parallel, inverted triangular configuration. Their FE were scored comprehensively from six aspects via an entropy evaluation method, as higher scores showed better results. For partial-thread screws, thread length and thread shape factor (TSF) are determinative factors on stability of FNF only if thread depth is not too thick, and they have less cut-out risk, better compression effects and better detached resistance of fracture than full-thread screws, whereas full-thread screws appear to have better shear and shortening resistance. A combination of two superior partial-thread screws and one inferior full-thread screw for vertical FNF may get optimal biomechanical outcomes. The type of cannulated screw is important to consider when treating vertical FNF.

BACKGROUND: Literature describing differences in motor control between low back pain (LBP) patients and healthy controls is very inconsistent, which may be an indication for the existence of subgroups. Pain-related psychological factors might play a role causing these differences. PURPOSE: To examine the relation between fear of movement and variability of kinematics and muscle activation during gait in LBP patients. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional experimental design. PATIENT SAMPLE: Thirty-one Chinese LBP patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-report measures: Visual Analog Score for pain; TAMPA-score; Physiologic measures: electromyography, range of motion. FUNCTIONAL MEASURES: LBP history; the physical load of profession, physical activity. METHODS: Patients were divided in high and low fear of movement groups. Participants walked on a treadmill at four speeds: very slow, slow, preferred and fast. Kinematics of the thorax and the pelvis were recorded, together with the electromyography of five bilateral trunk muscle pairs. Kinematic and electromyography data were analysed in terms of stride-to-stride pattern variability. Factor analysis was applied to assess interdependence of 11 variability measures. To test for differences between groups, a mixed-design multivariate analysis of variance was conducted. RESULTS: Kinematic variability and variability of muscle activation consistently loaded on different factors and thus represented different underlying variables. No significant Group effects on variability of kinematics and muscle activation were found (Hotelling's Trace F=0.237; 0.396, p=.959;.846, respectively). Speed significantly decreased kinematic variability and increased variability in muscle activation (Hotelling's Trace F=8.363; 4.595, p<.0001; <.0001, respectively). No significant interactions between Group and Speed were found (Hotelling's Trace F=0.204; 0.100, p=.762;.963, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study do not support the hypothesis that variability in trunk kinematics and trunk muscle activation during gait in LBP patients are associated with fear of movement.