Home Ahead of print Instructions
About us Current issue Subscribe
Editorial board Archives Contact us
Search Submit article Login 
Print this page Email this page
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 13  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 59-64

Issues in medical tourism: A presentation of three patients with degenerative spine diseases


Department of Surgery, Orthopaedic Unit, Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital/Bayero University, Kano, Nigeria

Correspondence Address:
Mohammed Kabir Abubakar
Department of Surgery, Orthopaedic Unit, Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital/Bayero University, P.M.B. 3011, Kano
Nigeria
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0331-8540.176043

Rights and Permissions

Introduction: Patient seeks medical treatment abroad for several reasons. It may be due to lack of expertise or lack of adequate equipment to handle the ailment in the country of abode. However, some may be due to social reasons or due to privileges that come with some social status and position. The study is justified by the need to high light some of the problems encountered by patients after treatment abroad. Materials and Methods: The case notes of three patients seen at the orthopaedic outpatient clinic were retrospectively reviewed. These patients had initially presented with different clinical problems. Data on their clinical history, examinations, investigations and treatment were extracted from their case note. Result: The first patient is a 53-year-old civil servant with clinical and radiological evidence of L4–L5 and L5–S1 disc degeneration with prolapse and neuropathy. He was cancelled for decompression and fusion. He opted to travel abroad for treatment. He represented few months later with the same complaint despite surgical treatment abroad. He had no physical evidence of what procedure was done. A second patient is a 68-year-old man with multilevel disc prolapsed and associated lumbar the canal stenosis. He was given the option of decompression with fusion. He opted to travel abroad, where he had L2–L5 laminectomy with pedicle screw stabilisation spanning three levels using four screws and two rods. His symptoms persisted despite procedure. He had evidence of the wrong choice of procedure. He is presently on conservative management as he does not want surgery. The third patient is a 50-year-old politician who presented with a painful gluteal swelling. She had transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion at L4–L5 with L2–S1 and laminectomy with L2–S1 pedicle screw stabilisation done abroad about 1 year before presentation. The indication being L4–L5 spondylolisthesis with L2–S1 multilevel disc prolapsed. She was found to have dislodged migrated rod. The rod was surgically extracted. Discussions and Conclusion: The First patient had the wrong/suboptimal procedure done to him. As such, he continued to have persistent pain. He cannot afford to go for appropriate procedure abroad. He is being planned for decompression and fusion. The second patient had suboptimal procedure. His pain continued. He could not afford to go for follow-up and re-evaluation. He also does not want any reoperation. He is now conservative management. The second patient had appropriate procedure done. However, she developed a technical complication which was not addressed appropriately. She had surgical extraction of the migrated rod and had done well.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed3955    
    Printed182    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded273    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal