In Part 1 of his presentation, Dr. Johnson reviewed typical changes in the voice that relate to aging. His research group does MRI work and imaging studies in both humans and rodents. An increase in the number of older adults has helped to shift research into how to improve the quality of life among this group. He likes the following definition of aging: "It is a time-independent series of cumulative, progressive, intrinsic, and deleterious functional and structural changes that usually begin to manifest themselves in reproductive maturity and eventually culminate in death." A hallmark of aging is individual variability. Changes due to aging are intrinsic and should be considered independently from external factors such as disease. The sound of our voice changes in pitch and vocal quality as we grow older. He compared the voice of actress Katherine Hepburn on two occasions separated by 50 years, involving factors, such as speech rate and articulation. He discussed the underlying physiology of voice production. With age, the primary effect on the vocal tract is muscle atrophy, which in relation to aging is called sarcopenia. He discussed the respiratory system. The primary change that influences voice is calcification of the costal cartilages and weakening of respiratory muscles, which leads to decreased respiratory capacity. A big cause of an increased effort to get the voice to work is what happens at the level of the larynx.

Dr. Rizzo began Part 2 of his grand round presentations with the question, “OK, what were our findings?” With existing GPS data sets, we need to be mindful of side view versus front view in where cameras are positioned. A data set being described had more side view images than front view, which can be extremely important for the visually impaired. He pointed to being excited  about a collaboration with the United Nations. We have shared these data with that organization and they are quite impressed with our results, which can be of potential use to blind individuals navigating the UN building. We are creating a cellphone application that uses vision in place recognition. The UN is providing some funding support for a master’s student working on this project. Dr. Rizzothen responded to a question regarding falls and whether there is information to assess the relative slipperiness of surfaces. Ground surfaces are attracting more attention, such as puddles and how to reroute pedestrians around hazardous terrain. He then described a reconstruction project that is underway to change different environments by developing new approaches to navigating subway stations consisting of multiple floors and tracks. He played a video clip that shows how reconstruction is occurring. He addressed the question of how we handle all this video data for these mobility platforms and what a technician must do with all this high-resolution video data arriving. He also indicated that we currently are looking at sending the data and having new transmission policies, and also work being accomplished on dual connectivity. A question-and-answer period followed his presentation.

John-Ross (JR) Rizzo, MD is a physician scientist at Rusk Rehabilitation. He leads the Visuomotor Integration Laboratory where his team focuses on eye-hand coordination as it relates to acquired brain injury. Dr. Rizzo has been recognized as a Top 40 under 40 by Crain’s for his industry-leading innovation and dedication to transforming the lives of those with vision deficiencies worldwide. 

Dr. Rizzo began Part 1 of a two-part grand rounds presentation by asking, “What if the lights suddenly went out in this room?” He then proceeded to discuss virtual reality demonstrations of the three biggest vision killers in the U.S.: age-related macular degeneration, glaucoma, and diabetic retinopathy. He showed a filter and asked the audience how disturbing it would be if you had it constantly sitting on top of your visual perception?  He displayed views to demonstrate profound differences between clear visual perception and altered perception secondary to these conditions. The problem is going from bad to worse. In the U.S., there are 27 million adults ages 18 and older who report vision loss, and by 2050, the number can be expected to approach 52 million. Impaired vision can affect mobility and lead to many problems, such as massive unemployment rates, quality of life losses, and functional dependencies. He then described current mobility solutions, such as primary mobility tools. A worry is that the standard of care can lead to an immobility downward spiral. So as a consequence, obesity, stroke, and diabetes among other problems such as falls all jump upward. He provided a description of many devices being developed to deal with vision loss. The differences between the spatial world of the blind and the sighted were illustrated. Dr. Rizzo described a lengthy itemization of impediments to navigation on city sidewalks that visually impaired individuals must attempt to deal with successfully.

Dr. Antonio Stecco is an Assistant Professor at Rusk Rehabilitation, New York University. A physiatrist, he has been President of the Fascial Manipulation Association since 2010, Assistant to the President of the International Society of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation from 2012 to 2014, and President of the International Myopain Society since 2020. His scientific activity is devoted to the study of the human fasciae from a macroscopically, histologically and patho-physiologically point of view. He personally made over 100 cadaver dissections for research. From 2007, he organized and personally held theoretical-practical courses about the Fascial Manipulation method in all five continents. The author of more than 50 in extensor papers about the fascia, Dr. Stecco has co-authored 5 books and is co-author of different chapters of international books. His medical degree and PhD degree are from the University of Padova in Italy.

In Part 1, we discussed: what attracted him to accept a position at NYU Langone Health; whether the COVID resurgence affected his ability to do research and furnish care for patients; results of his research on a comparison between traditional rehabilitation treatment and fascial manipulation of chronic neck pain; the results of a study he conducted on the role played by fasciae in ankle injuries sustained by basketball players; differences between males and females in the kind of injuries they sustain to their ankles and other body parts playing basketball; his training of major league baseball players in using fascial manipulation to decrease injury and improve performance; how to decrease injury among soccer players; and how fascial or muscle stretching exercises are an integral part of rehabilitation and athletics. 

In Part 2, we discussed: why determining the underlying cause of elbow pain can prove to be difficult; what new developments have occurred since he co-authored an article on the topic of treatment options for fascial disorders; apart from treatment modalities he described, how other interventions such as surgery, medications, and physical therapy are applied; patients' use of complementary, alternative, and integrative forms of treatment; his use of telemedicine in the treatment of patients; the time lag between when medical innovations occur and their widespread adoption; and current studies in which he is involved or expects to undertake with his NYU colleagues

Dr. Antonio Stecco is an Assistant Professor at Rusk Rehabilitation, New York University. A physiatrist, he has been President of the Fascial Manipulation Association since 2010, Assistant to the President of the International Society of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation from 2012 to 2014, and President of the International Myopain Society since 2020. His scientific activity is devoted to the study of the human fasciae from a macroscopically, histologically and patho-physiologically point of view. He personally made over 100 cadaver dissections for research. From 2007, he organized and personally held theoretical-practical courses about the Fascial Manipulation method in all five continents. The author of more than 50 in extensor papers about the fascia, Dr. Stecco has co-authored 5 books and is co-author of different chapters of international books. His medical degree and PhD degree are from the University of Padova in Italy.

In Part 1, we discussed: what attracted him to accept a position at NYU Langone Health; whether the COVID resurgence affected his ability to do research and furnish care for patients; results of his research on a comparison between traditional rehabilitation treatment and fascial manipulation of chronic neck pain; the results of a study he conducted on the role played by fasciae in ankle injuries sustained by basketball players; differences between males and females in the kind of injuries they sustain to their ankles and other body parts playing basketball; his training of major league baseball players in using fascial manipulation to decrease injury and improve performance; how to decrease injury among soccer players; and how fascial or muscle stretching exercises are an integral part of rehabilitation and athletics.  

Part 2

Advance care planning involves talking now about the future and the setting where someone has deteriorating health and is not able to converse with clinicians about patients’ wishes, preferences, fears, expectations of what is going on, and their hopes. At this juncture, there can be a discussion about a patient’s quality of life and what he or she would like it to be. Sometimes, patient preferences can be put into advance directives (e.g., a living will or a medical power-of-attorney). Some barriers to advance care planning were described. Examples of patient barriers are procrastination, apathy, and fear of burdening the family. Some provider barriers are a lack of desire in talking about a negative future outcome and not wanting to burden patients and families by discussing this topic. Two other big considerations are time constraints on the part of providers and a general lack of knowledge about advance directives. It is important to be able to offer some sort of direction to families regarding possible health care outcomes even when there is a lot of uncertainty. End-of-life care can make some individuals nervous, which is understandable. Withholding or withdrawing interventions that are not in line with patient goals is OK. We do not want to cause any harm or do inappropriate things. As long as we are eliciting what is important to families and doing what meets their goals, generally speaking, we are doing the right thing. 

Part 1

Although cancer is the second lead cause of death in the U.S., the rate has been falling. It is becoming more of a chronic disease and has a treatment paradigm that is different from the past. Cancer also is the second most common cause of disability claims. Breast and prostate cancer have a heightened incidence of disabling complications, which is relevant because it is a potential interplay area of palliative care and rehabilitation. Fewer patients are dying in hospitals while the home and hospice settings are on a little upswing. He mentioned common symptoms (e.g., pain and shortness of breath) at end-of-life that differentiate patients with cancer from those who do not have it. The ultimate goal of palliative care and rehabilitation is to improve quality of life. Palliative medicine is one component of the bigger group of palliative care interventions. Regarding hospice care, someone may or may not be eligible for hospice services because of the insurance situation, but everybody is eligible for good end-of-life care and that is what can be provided regardless of insurance status. He then discussed what rehabilitation entails. One main focus is pain management. He indicated ways in which rehabilitation and palliative care can be provided together effectively in four domains, e.g., caregiver support.

PART TWO

In Part 1, Dr. Kim presented information about the historical and legal background for cannabis, variations in policies in the states, and the status of current research. In Part 2, she discussed cancer pain that is not neuropathic. She described the results of a study that involved opioid refractory cancer pain. Evidence currently shows that patients who have increased access to cannabis actually have higher rates of opioid overdose and deaths. She reviewed a case of one of her patients who had prostate cancer. This individual was not amenable to physical therapy and was weaned off opioids because they were not effective. Finally, they decided to try different types of cannabis for pain and sleep and he is doing quite well. He eventually used a combination of low and high THC capsules and was weaned off all other drugs. She and her colleagues also looked at how patients considered the use of cannabinoid therapy and found that overall they preferred it for their future chemo. Even though cannabis is a natural product, it is not true that it is free of side effects. There is some concern that it can have interactions on the heart, result in psychotic symptoms, affect psychomotor performance, and lead to an increase in tolerance, making it necessary to use higher and higher doses to achieve the same effect. A question-and-answer period followed her presentation. 

PART ONE

In Part 1 of a two-segment presentation, Dr. Kim discussed historical and legal background for medical cannabis and cannabis in general; mechanism of action; applications for pain and symptom management; the science behind cannabis for cancer care; relative safety issues; contraindications and monitoring; and some public health concerns. She defined cannabis, marijuana, hemp, and indicated various code names for recreational marijuana. Marijuana was criminalized and removed from the U.S. Pharmacopeia in 1941, Most recently, some states have legalized it both medically and recreationally. For medical purposes, there is a lot of variation in what states will allow. A concern has been about the presence of contaminants in many products. Based on current research, the science and the evidence are not where they could be ideally. She discussed marijuana and how it works, mentioning the endocannabinoid system. Different ways exist to act on that system. She described the entourage effect and how it functions.

D

Dr. Kim received his medical degree from SUNY Brooklyn and he completed a residency in both physical medicine and rehabilitation, along with a fellowship in anesthesiology and pain management at Mt. Sinai. He is board certified in both PM&R and anesthesiology.

In Part 1 of his presentation, he indicated that he would mention some specific products and companies, but he does not have a financial relationship with them. One of his objectives is to provide background information about PNS. Currently, there is an increase in this kind of technology and also in the demand for non-opioid pain management. PNS can be fitted into the specialty of neuro modulation, a field that touches upon multiple specialties, including PM&R. The basic goal in PNS is to stimulate the nerve and reduce unwanted pain. PNS has been around since the early 1960s.  Pain is the most common indicator for employing its usage. Dr. Kim has a specific interest in post-stroke shoulder pain, which is a difficult condition to treat. Post-surgical pain in general and post-amputation pain have led to the increased demand for PNS. Complications of this kind of treatment include the risk of infection and scarring around the nerve. Modern implantables show why PNS has increased in demand because technology has led to more miniaturization of these stimulators, which significantly has decreased the amount of invasiveness. Based on work performed at Rusk, he mentioned how research findings have been shared with professional organizations, such as the North American Neuromodulation Society (NANS).

In Part 2 of his presentation, he continued describing the current state of research on the use of PNS, which to some degree is lacking, but certainly it potentially is increasing. He referred to a multi-center, randomized, double-blind investigation that looked at PNS technologies in a variety of pain conditions. He then described a product that was cleared by the FDA in July 2016. It involves the use of multiple electronic leads rather than using a single one. The implant used is of a temporary nature (60 days) rather than something permanently. He pointed out that because the technology is much smaller, no incision is necessary. The micro lead is much smaller in diameter and does not have to be as close to the nerve. He showed a video about a typical implant for a shoulder, involving the 60-day version of technology being used. While it played, he narrated some of the steps shown in the video regarding the implant of the electrode. Everything becomes stabilized as the electrode moves closer to the nerve. His presentation concluded with his fielding questions asked by participants at this event, including two by Dr. Steven Flanagan, Director of the Rusk Rehabilitation Institute at NYU Langone Health.

Dr. Kim received his medical degree from SUNY Brooklyn and he completed a residency in both physical medicine and rehabilitation, along with a fellowship in anesthesiology and pain management at Mt. Sinai. He is board certified in both PM&R and anesthesiology.

In Part 1 of his presentation, he indicated that he would mention some specific products and companies, but he does not have a financial relationship with them. One of his objectives is to provide background information about PNS. Currently, there is an increase in this kind of technology and also in the demand for non-opioid pain management. PNS can be fitted into the specialty of neuro modulation, a field that touches upon multiple specialties, including PM&R. The basic goal in PNS is to stimulate the nerve and reduce unwanted pain. PNS has been around since the early 1960s.  Pain is the most common indicator for employing its usage. Dr. Kim has a specific interest in post-stroke shoulder pain, which is a difficult condition to treat. Post-surgical pain in general and post-amputation pain have led to the increased demand for PNS. Complications of this kind of treatment include the risk of infection and scarring around the nerve. Modern implantables show why PNS has increased in demand because technology has led to more miniaturization of these stimulators, which significantly has decreased the amount of invasiveness. Based on work performed at Rusk, he mentioned how research findings have been shared with professional organizations, such as the North American Neuromodulation Society (NANS).

In Part 1 of his presentation, Dr. Branski discussed how efforts are underway to push research over the top in productivity at NYU. It is important to consider the economic implications of research. Obtaining external support is not easy and we should celebrate those accomplishments when funding is obtained. Voice disorders are the single most common communication disorder across the lifespan. He mentioned the importance of Reinke’s space and his contributions in describing the layered structure of the vocal folds. He indicated how challenging it is to deal with the problem of vocal fold necrosis. 

In Part 2 of his presentation, Dr. Branski discussed voice research, an area of investigation that not only poses the most opportunities, but also the most obstacles. He also mentioned developments in addressing tissue deficits in the airway. He closed on the theme that research needs to be opportunistic and that what is of value in this institution is to enhance communication between the thousand clinicians at NYU and the researchers. 

A Q & A period followed.

In Part 1 of his presentation, Dr. Branski discussed how efforts are underway to push research over the top in productivity at NYU. It is important to consider the economic implications of research. Obtaining external support is not easy and we should celebrate those accomplishments when funding is obtained. Voice disorders are the single most common communication disorder across the lifespan. He mentioned the importance of Reinke’s space and his contributions in describing the layered structure of the vocal folds. He indicated how challenging it is to deal with the problem of vocal fold necrosis. 

In Part 2 of his presentation, Dr. Branski discussed voice research, an area of investigation that not only poses the most opportunities, but also the most obstacles. He also mentioned developments in addressing tissue deficits in the airway. He closed on the theme that research needs to be opportunistic and that what is of value in this institution is to enhance communication between the thousand clinicians at NYU and the researchers. 

A Q & A period followed.

This is a special two-part Grand Rounds series with Dr. Steven Flanagan, Professor and Chairman of Rehabilitation Medicine and Medical Director of Rusk Rehabilitation. 

In Part 1 of his presentation, Dr. Flanagan discusses the contributions of Dr. Howard Rusk, the father of rehabilitation medicine. He brought it to the forefront as a recognized specialty by showing that rehabilitation contributed to improving the lives of patients with disabilities. Dr. Flanagan referred to various efforts over the decades to manage health care costs through managed care and other means. Even today when it is evident that a inpatient care is necessary, barriers can offer resistance because of the costs involved. What makes the case of inpatient care more challenging is the need to have more data to justify the decision to provide care at that level. He predicts that cost containment will continue well into the future. Our aims are to improve health care outcomes and increase efficiency. He concluded Part 1 of his presentation by stating that PM&R has a critical role to play in attaining the Triple Aim.

In Part 2 of his presentation, Dr. Flanagan discusses challenges involved in justifying the need for the provision of inpatient rehabilitation care in the context of controlling expenditures and the critical role that physical medicine and rehabilitation play in attaining the Triple Aim. We know that the intensity of some of our rehabilitation therapies are associated with better outcomes, for example, aphasia therapy. Early mobilization results in better outcomes with cost savings. Nonetheless, we still need more data to show that what we do is important. Mention was made of expansions at Rusk, such as a new division on Technology and Innovation to advance rehabilitation science. Health care is changing and education must change with it.

This is a special two-part Grand Rounds series with Dr. Steven Flanagan, Professor and Chairman of Rehabilitation Medicine and Medical Director of Rusk Rehabilitation. 

In Part 1 of his presentation, Dr. Flanagan discusses the contributions of Dr. Howard Rusk, the father of rehabilitation medicine. He brought it to the forefront as a recognized specialty by showing that rehabilitation contributed to improving the lives of patients with disabilities. Dr. Flanagan referred to various efforts over the decades to manage health care costs through managed care and other means. Even today when it is evident that a inpatient care is necessary, barriers can offer resistance because of the costs involved. What makes the case of inpatient care more challenging is the need to have more data to justify the decision to provide care at that level. He predicts that cost containment will continue well into the future. Our aims are to improve health care outcomes and increase efficiency. He concluded Part 1 of his presentation by stating that PM&R has a critical role to play in attaining the Triple Aim.

In Part 2 of his presentation, Dr. Flanagan discusses challenges involved in justifying the need for the provision of inpatient rehabilitation care in the context of controlling expenditures and the critical role that physical medicine and rehabilitation play in attaining the Triple Aim. We know that the intensity of some of our rehabilitation therapies are associated with better outcomes, for example, aphasia therapy. Early mobilization results in better outcomes with cost savings. Nonetheless, we still need more data to show that what we do is important. Mention was made of expansions at Rusk, such as a new division on Technology and Innovation to advance rehabilitation science. Health care is changing and education must change with it.